Skip to main content
. 2017 Apr 4;7:45469. doi: 10.1038/srep45469

Figure 3. Results between head-mounted virtual reality (HMD-VR) and conventional training (CT).

Figure 3

Inset bar graphs show group means and standard errors as well as individual means during the rotation block. (A) Target error, measured by subtracting hand angle from target angle, for the HMD-VR group (orange) and the CT group (blue). No significant differences were found between the groups during the baseline + report, rotation + report, or no feedback blocks (Blocks 2–4). (B) Aiming angle, measured as the aiming number reported by the participant, for HMD-VR (orange) and CT (blue). The aiming angle was significantly larger (t(22) = 4.00, p < 0.001) for HMD-VR compared to the CT group during the rotation + report block (Block 3). (C) Implicit adaptation (aiming angle and rotation subtracted from the target error) for HMD-VR (orange) and CT (blue). The IA was significantly smaller (t(22) = 3.67, p = 0.001) for HMD-VR compared to the CT environment during the rotation + report block (Block 3).