psych talk 4-2-07

Immersive Virtual Humans for Interpersonal Skills Education : 

Immersive Virtual Humans for Interpersonal Skills Education Benjamin Lok Virtual Experiences Research Group Computer and Information Science and Engineering Department College of Engineering April 2nd, 2007

Outline and Goals : 

Outline and Goals Virtual Humans Definitions Technology Previous Work Research Results Virtual Patients Psychology studies Getting involved

Virtual Humans : 

Virtual Humans Virtual Humans – computer representations of humans Application domains: Games Movies Simulation

Virtual Humans : 

Virtual Humans Virtual Humans – computer representations of humans Interfaces Output Monitors Projects Head-Mounted Displays Haptics Input Keyboard/Mouse Speech Gestures Higher Level Concepts Eye gaze Empathy

Virtual Humans in Therapy : 

Virtual Humans in Therapy Simulating social situations Virtual Humans and fear of public speaking [Pertaub 2004] Virtual practice reduces anxiety or failures in reality Treatment validated with traditional methods Other situations Anxiety disorder Social phobias Posttraumatic Stress Disorder

Virtual Humans in Training : 

Virtual Humans in Training Training ICT - military leadership training [Hill 2003] America’s Army

Virtual Humans in Medicine : 

Virtual Humans in Medicine Traditional approaches [Bearman 2003] Choose Your Own Adventure Dialogue systems Mannequins Human Patient Simulator [Meurs 1997] Training JUST VR [Ponder 2002] Emergencies Virtual Standardized Patient [Hubal 2000] Practice interactions Virtual Surgeries

Immersive Virtual Characters for Educating Medical Communication Skills : 

Immersive Virtual Characters for Educating Medical Communication Skills A. Deladisma, D. S. Lind Dept of Surgical Oncology (Medical College of Georgia) K. Johnsen, A. Raij, B. Rossen, B. Lok Dept of Comp and Info Science and Eng (College of Eng) M. Cohen, A. Stevens Dept of Surgery (College of Med) J. Cendan Dept of Community Health and Family Med (College of Med) R. Ferdig College of Education

Can Virtual Humans Enable… : 

Can Virtual Humans Enable…

Project Description : 

Project Description Simulate a standardized patient encounter Allow repeated interaction with an Immersive, interactive virtual patient in a constrained scenario Virtual patient, DIANA Virtual instructor, VIC Communication skills Interpersonal Simulator

Slide 11: 

Play Video Things to look for: interaction modalities

Why VHs? : 

Why VHs? Standardization Twiddle one thing Abnormal findings Repetition Feedback

System : 

System Low Cost < $8,000(USD) COTSComponents Potential: Every Hospital

Natural Interaction Input : 

Natural Interaction Input No Keyboard, No Mouse Speech Recognition Dragon Naturally Speaking 8 Pro Accuracy 90+% with 10 minutes training 70% match to database Track Communication Cues Non-Verbal Track head gaze Track left hand Track body lean Verbal Inflection Jargon Gesture Recognition Pointing, handshake

Natural Interaction Output : 

Natural Interaction Output DIANA and VIC look at user Life-size characters Animation Hand gestures Head movement Perspective-Correct Rendering Why this works Does not rely on complete sentences Constrained scenario Students trained on specific questions

Studies : 

Studies Project started January 2004 (-March 2007) Ten studies n = 150+ Testing Centers Harrell Center at UF Medical College of Georgia Keele University, School of Pharmacy Focus Establish validity Study similarity/differences

Studies : 

Studies 2004 April: Project initiated August: Prototype (n=7) UF October: Experts (n=3) UF December: Pilot Test (n=10) UF 2005 June: Two Institutions (n=16) UF/MCG July: VP vs SP (n=16, n=8) UF/MCG October: Cultural Bias (n=16) MCG October: Class Integration (n=33) UF 2006 November: (n=12) MCG, (n=15) Keele 2007 February: (n=16) MCG Testing Centers Harrell Center at UF Medical College of Georgia Keele University, School of Pharmacy

VP ≈? SP : 

VP ≈? SP How is experiencing an interpersonal scenario with a virtual person similar to – and different from – experiencing an interpersonal scenario with a real person? Clearly different But… in what important ways? The study asks: Are post-encounter impressions similar? Are empathy and other emotions and attitudes similarly expressed? Which social constructs are followed? These questions must be explored to: Determine the extent to which interpersonal scenarios can be simulated with virtual humans Identify how component technologies need to improve to enable effective interpersonal virtual human systems

Behavioral Measures : 

Behavioral Measures Empathy Empathetic moment – “I’m scared, can you help me?” Expressed the same % and same # of times (SP = 2.2, VP = 1.3) But… Appears less genuine (very robotic) Conversation flow is “rapid-fire” Confirmatory phrases statistically different (SP = 20, VP = 3.5) Overall experiences similar Questions asked Global measures Education goals met Students rated educational merits similarly Students rated difficulty similarly Global measures of realism do not work Battery of specific measures more accurate Practice tool in addition to SPs

Current Work : 

Current Work Classroom incorporation Technology evaluation Visualization Bias Race/Ethnicity Gender Age Weight Mixed Reality patients Abnormal findings Physiological Measures Anxiety (Sexual History)

Current Work : 

Current Work Classroom incorporation Technology evaluation Visualization Bias Race/Ethnicity Gender Age Weight Mixed Reality patients Abnormal findings Physiological Measures Anxiety (Sexual History)

Pain Studies : 

Pain Studies Mike Robinson, Clinical and Health Psychology Perception of Pain 1 Independent Variable

What we think we know about VHs : 

What we think we know about VHs Interaction with a virtual human is validated. Expert observer ratings of virtual patient interactions are correlated (r=0.49) with standardized patient interactions. Conversation content with a virtual patient is similar to that with a standardized patient, even if the method be might more robotic. Although the interaction with a VP is not identical to a SP, some educational objectives can be achieved. High level concepts, e.g. empathy, require further research. Natural interaction with virtual humans is important for teaching communication skills. People interacting with VHs can exhibit subconscious/involuntary responses Gaze People interacting with VHs can exhibit socially conditioned responses Sneeze Empathy

Replicating Classic Human-Human Psychology Studies : 

Replicating Classic Human-Human Psychology Studies Virtual Humans allow conducting studies that are challenging: Ethically Bailenson Logistically Understanding the impact of VHs

Milgram Obedience : 

Milgram Obedience Slater – University College of London Virtual Reprise of the Stanley Milgram Obedience Experiments Mel Slater, Antley, Davison, Swapp, Guger, Barker, Pistrang, Sanchez-Vives

Blascovich Social Facilitation : 

Blascovich Social Facilitation Zanbaka, et. al., UNC-Charlotte Study Design Task (Easy or Hard) Observer (Human or Virtual Human) Virtual Human Variables Gender Human vs. Alien Results Effects similar to original study Effects not as strong

Asch Conformity : 

Asch Conformity Harold Rodriguez (junior) Can virtual humans cause you to conform? What if you thought people were controlling the virtual human?

Virtual Experiences Research Group : 

Virtual Experiences Research Group PhD Students Kyle Johnsen, Aaron Kotranza, John Quarels Andrew Raij, Xiyong Wang, Brent Rossen Undergraduates Joshua Horton, Harold Rodriguez Funding National Science Foundation, University of Florida Colleges of Engineering and Medicine, Medical College of Georgia, Keele University, School of Pharmacy

Join Us! : 

Join Us! We need your expertise! Studying the current system Future research Thank you! http://www.cise.ufl.edu/research/vegroup Questions?