Premium
Physical Models Dominate: The Pirate Patch Study
Author(s) -
Wolak Liliana K.,
Pukas Giancarlo A.,
Zheng Yu Hang,
Norman Geoffrey R.,
Monteiro Sandra D.,
Wainman Bruce C.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
the faseb journal
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.709
H-Index - 277
eISSN - 1530-6860
pISSN - 0892-6638
DOI - 10.1096/fasebj.31.1_supplement.582.2
Subject(s) - cadaver , context (archaeology) , cadaveric spasm , computer science , differential effects , haptic technology , artificial intelligence , stereopsis , medicine , anatomy , geology , paleontology
Prior studies have shown physical models are superior learning tools compared to interactive‐two‐dimensional models (3D images on 2D surfaces) and key views of the specimen when tested on a cadaver. Additionally, we have shown that haptic feedback and transfer‐appropriate processing do not contribute to the superiority of the physical model. In the current study, we explored the role of stereopsis in the same context. During the learning phase, we compared a condition with both eyes uncovered to a condition with the non‐dominant eye covered, removing stereopsis. The results further validate that physical models are superior to the interactive 2D model. Participants in the physical model group performed significantly better than those in the interactive 2D group on structure identification on the cadaveric pelvis (64% vs 47%, p < 0.001). Furthermore, the use of two eyes was superior to one eye (62% vs 49%, p < 0.01). However, there were no interactions, suggesting that stereopsis had no differential effect in the 2D model. Ultimately, these results further support the superiority of the physical model for anatomy education.