Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Gestalt Principles of Perception01:21

Gestalt Principles of Perception

814
Gestalt principles provide a framework for understanding how humans perceive objects as unified wholes within their context. These principles are essential in explaining the cognitive processes that make sense of complex visual stimuli by organizing them into coherent groups. One fundamental principle is proximity, which posits that objects located close to each other are perceived as a collective group. For instance, when dots are positioned near one another, the visual system interprets them...
814
Virtual Work01:20

Virtual Work

1.1K
The principle of virtual work states that if a body is in static and dynamic equilibrium, then the sum of all the virtual work done by all external forces and couple moments for any given virtual displacement must be zero.
In static equilibrium, a body can experience an imaginary or virtual movement, such as displacement or rotation. The virtual work done by a force is equal to the dot product of force and virtual displacement in the direction of the force. When it comes to virtually rotating a...
1.1K
Inertial Frames of Reference01:03

Inertial Frames of Reference

8.3K
Newton’s first law is usually considered to be a statement about reference frames. It provides a method for identifying a special type of reference frame: the inertial reference frame. In principle, we can make the net force on a body zero. If its velocity relative to a given frame is constant, then that frame is said to be inertial. So, by definition, an inertial reference frame is a reference frame where Newton's first law holds valid. Newton's first law applies to objects with...
8.3K
Principle of Virtual Work: Problem Solving01:13

Principle of Virtual Work: Problem Solving

1.4K
The principle of virtual work is an essential concept in the field of mechanics and engineering. This is used to solve problems related to the equilibrium of a structure or system. It is based on the assumption that if a system is in equilibrium, the work done by all the forces during a virtual displacement is zero. This principle is applied by considering virtual displacements of the system and the corresponding work done by internal and external forces.
To apply the principle of virtual work,...
1.4K
Virtual Work for a System of Connected Rigid Bodies01:06

Virtual Work for a System of Connected Rigid Bodies

574
Virtual work is a powerful method used to solve problems involving several connected rigid bodies. When the system is in equilibrium, virtual work is zero. This allows the calculation of the resulting forces when a system undergoes a virtual displacement. When attempting to analyze such a system, first, use a free-body diagram, where an independent coordinate represents the configuration of the links, and mark its deflected position resulting from the positive virtual displacement.
Next,...
574
Structuralism01:26

Structuralism

2.7K
Structuralism, an early psychological theory developed by Wilhelm Wundt and his student Edward Bradford Titchener, sought to dissect the human mind into its most fundamental components. Wundt's groundbreaking work in his laboratory set the stage for Titchener to define structuralism's goal as cataloging the "atoms" of the mind—sensations, images, and feelings—akin to how chemists identify elements of matter.
Titchener's approach to structuralism was unique. He...
2.7K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Ergonomics Analysis for a Simulation Approach to Human-Robot Collaborative Task Allocation.

IISE transactions on occupational ergonomics and human factors·2025
Same author

Using Smart Displays to Implement an eHealth System for Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions: Randomized Controlled Trial.

JMIR aging·2025
Same author

Robotic reading companions can mitigate oral reading anxiety in children.

Science robotics·2025
Same author

How can educational robots enhance family life? Through careful integration.

Science robotics·2025
Same author

Uniting theory and data: the promise and challenge of creating an honest model of facial expression.

Cognition & emotion·2025
Same author

Human-Robot Collaboration With a Corrective Shared Controlled Robot in a Sanding Task.

Human factors·2024

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 18, 2025

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
06:53

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation

Published on: March 1, 2017

13.6K

The virtual and the physical: two frames of mind.

Bilge Mutlu1

  • 1Department of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI 53706, USA.

Iscience
|February 4, 2021
PubMed
Summary

Virtual and physical agents, though technologically similar, create different user mindsets. This distinction impacts interaction, engagement, and outcomes, necessitating tailored design approaches for each embodiment.

Area of Science:

  • Human-Computer Interaction
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Cognitive Science

Background:

  • Virtual and physical agents share core technologies for perception, planning, and interaction.
  • Traditionally, designers view these embodiments as interchangeable, prioritizing application demands.
  • This interchangeability overlooks fundamental differences in user experience and interaction dynamics.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To argue that virtual and physical embodiments create distinct user "frames of mind".
  • To explore how these differing frames influence user expectations, engagement, and interaction outcomes.
  • To identify key mechanisms driving these differences and their design implications.

Main Methods:

  • Analysis of virtual and physical agent interactions through five key mechanisms: situativity, interactivity, agency, proxemics, and believability.
Keywords:
Artificial IntelligenceCognitive NeurosciencePsychologySocial Sciences

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality
10:14

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality

Published on: May 10, 2024

1.5K
Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine
07:05

Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine

Published on: October 27, 2016

9.4K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 18, 2025

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation
06:53

Creating Virtual-hand and Virtual-face Illusions to Investigate Self-representation

Published on: March 1, 2017

13.6K
Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality
10:14

Author Spotlight: Enhancing Neurorehabilitation Through EEG, Motor Imagery, and Virtual Reality

Published on: May 10, 2024

1.5K
Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine
07:05

Visualization Method for Proprioceptive Drift on a 2D Plane Using Support Vector Machine

Published on: October 27, 2016

9.4K
  • Comparative examination of user expectations and engagement patterns across different embodiment types.
  • Delineation of design implications based on the identified differences in user "frames of mind".

    • Main Results:

    • Virtual and physical embodiments elicit fundamentally different user "frames of mind".
    • These differences manifest through distinct interpretations of situativity, interactivity, agency, proxemics, and believability.
    • User expectations, engagement, and interaction outcomes diverge significantly based on embodiment type.

    Conclusions:

    • The choice between virtual and physical embodiments is not merely practical but deeply affects user psychology and interaction.
    • Designers must consider the distinct "frames of mind" evoked by each embodiment.
    • Specific interaction domains are better suited to either virtual or physical agent embodiments for optimal outcomes.