Safety+Health Magazine: You don a virtual reality headset. Then, the floor begins to shake and the sound of an “industrial whine” is heard as you shoot into an illusionary world 30 feet above the ground on a platform connected to another by a thin walkway.
For many visitors to the Virtual Human Interaction Lab at Stanford University, one of their first experiences is “walking the plank.”
3 comments:
I can definitely see the pros and cons of using virtual reality in safety training, and I would say that after reading this article I definitely connect more with the pros (probably because of the bias towards the benefit of VR teaching and learning processes). I think the issue with safety training, which is briefly touched upon, is that VR in the safety world might create a false sense of preparedness for hazardous situations, particularly in instances where the issue you are facing in the real world might be just similar enough but just different enough to the virtual experience. Every situation is going to be a little different, so the VR trainings are not going to necessarily be able to cover those differences, and the cost of the VR training is currently too high to risk that. I think it is interesting that it says it was best for low-level training and introductory level courses, but it also makes sense as this technology can bridge a gap of learning while providing some safety from real world training where there is more potential for harm. It will be interesting to see if there is a way this can be integrated into theatrical training processes.
VR training could be the way of the future in terms of making trainings more accessible to all people. Take, for example, the Tait NAV training we took last semester. There, we were confined in the virtual world where it was safe to make mistakes in the learning process instead of breaking machinery that can cost tens of thousands of dollars, if not far more. However, as Mary Emily wrote, this can also create a false sense of preparedness. There were several times where I noticed myself and others all to trigger-happy when testing cues. In the virtual world, this is no problem, however if that is how we learn we don't necessarily develop the necessary instincts that automation demands. At the end of the day, I think VR can compliment real-world training to explore inaccessible or even too dangerous to demonstrate. Another example I can think of is when I used to fly gliders. In that world, you generally have a copilot with you when you first get into a new aircraft, however many gliders are only one-seat, meaning you're by yourself the first time you fly a new plane. This can be incredibly daunting, but flight simulators that accurately model the control characteristics can ease you in. This was never a substitute for the many hours of flight-time in other aircraft, but it was a good compliment.
I hadn’t considered the use of VR for safety training before, but it’s an interesting idea that has its pros and cons. Their point about making training accessible for either emergency situations that you wouldn’t want to put a person in in real life, or for equipment that is either in a different physical location or that training a person on will be costly, is a really cool application of this technology. I do agree that VR isn’t a substitute for actual hands-on experience - I can run a flight simulator all I want, but if I then tried to fly a plane on my own it most likely wouldn’t go well. Partially due to the probable differences between the simulation and the actual equipment, and partially because the operation of some equipment requires you to actually feel what is happening rather than just seeing it. I do think it’s an inspired use of technology and it would be interesting to see it widespread and VR technology moving past video games and into something more useful.
Post a Comment