Executive functions play a crucial role in daily life. Among them, planning is key to setting and achieving goals efficiently. Therefore, having appropriate and relevant tools for its assessment is essential. This study aimed to analyze the reliability and validity of the Virtual Supermarket Test (VST), a virtual reality (VR)-based tool designed to ecologically assess planning. An instrumental study was conducted with 210 adults from Buenos Aires (55.9% women), aged 18–65 years (M = 32; SD = 14.7). Results indicate that the VST has a unidimensional internal structure, with all items collectively explaining 64.68% of the total variance. Evidence of internal consistency (KR-20 = .80), content validity, and concurrent validity (rho = .425, p < .001) was found. Both neuropsychology experts and participants reported positive feedback, highlighting the clarity of instructions and the task’s relevance. These findings support the potential of VR technologies in the development of ecologically valid neuropsychological assessment tools.
AdriasolaA.TorresS. C.CañadaY.Chicchi-GiglioliI. A.García-BlancoA.SierraP.López-CerveróM.ChloeB. R.NavalónP.MarianoA. R. (2024). Assessing executive functioning in schizophrenia: Concurrent and discriminative validity of a novel virtual cooking task. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 27, 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2023.0443
2.
AshendorfL.JeffersonA. L.O’ConnorM. K.ChaissonC.GreenR. C.SternR. A. (2008). Trail Making Test errors in normal aging, mild cognitive impairment, and dementia. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology: The Official Journal of the National Academy of Neuropsychologists, 23(2), 129–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acn.2007.11.005
3.
AtoM.LópezJ.BenaventeA. (2013). Un sistema de clasificación de los diseños de investigación en psicología. Anales de Psicología, 29(3), 1038–1059. https://doi.org/10.6018/analesps.29.3.178511
4.
AubinG.BéliveauM. F.y KlingerE. (2018). An exploration of the ecological validity of the Virtual Action Planning–Supermarket (VAP-S) with people with schizophrenia. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 28(5), 689–708. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2015.1074083
5.
BaikeliR.DanliL.ZhuL.WangZ. (2021). The relationship between time perspective and meaning in life across different age stages in adulthood. Personality and Individual Differences, 174(1), Article 10668. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.110668
6.
BandalosD. L.FinneyS. J. (2019). Factor analysis: Exploratory and confirmatory. In HancockG. R.StapletonL. M.MuellerR. O. (Eds.), The reviewer’s guide to quantitative methods in the social sciences (2nd ed., pp. 98–122). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315755649
7.
BañosR.BotellaC.García-PalaciosA.VillaH.PerpiñáC.GallardoM. (2009). Psychological variables and reality judgment in virtual environments: The roles of absorption and dissociation. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 2(2), 143–148. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.1999.2.143
8.
Bausela-HerreraE. (2014). Funciones ejecutivas: nociones del desarrollo desde una perspectiva neuropsicológica [Executive functions: developmental notions from a neuropsychological perspective]. Acción Psicológica, 11(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.5944/ap.1.1.13789
9.
BorghettiD.ZanobiniC.NatolaI.OttinoS.ParentiA.Brugada-RamentolV.JalaliH.BozorgzadehA. (2023). Evaluating cognitive performance using virtual reality gamified exercises. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 4, Article 1153145. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2023.1153145
10.
BorgnisF.BaglioF.PedroliE.RossettoF.UccellatoreL.OliveiraJ. A. G.RivaG.CipressoP. (2022). Available virtual reality-based tools for executive functions: A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 13, Article 833136. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.833136
11.
BowieC.HarveyP. (2006). Administration and interpretation of the Trail Making Test. Nature Protocols, 1, 2277–2281. https://doi.org/10.1038/nprot.2006.390
12.
BowmanD. A.GabbardJ. L.HixD. (2002). A survey of usability evaluation in virtual environments: Classification and comparison of methods. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 11(4), 404–424. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474602760204309
13.
BraekenJ.van AssenM. A. L.M. (2017). An empirical Kaiser criterion. Psychological Methods, 22(3), 450–466. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000074
14.
CañadaY.TorresS. C.Andreu-MartinezJ.CristanchoD. B.Chicchi GiglioliI. A.Garcia-BlancoA.AdriasolaA.NavalónP.SierraP.AlcañizM. (2024). Characterization and assessment of executive functions through a virtual cooking task in euthymic patients with bipolar disorder. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 178, 349–358. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.08.007
CazzatoV.BassoD.CutiniS.BisiacchiP. (2010). Gender differences in visuospatial planning: An eye movements study. Behavioural Brain Research, 206(2), 177–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2009.09.010
17.
Chicchi-GiglioliI. A.PérezB.GilA.AlcañizM. (2021). The virtual cooking task: A preliminary comparison between neuropsychological and ecological virtual reality tests to assess executive functions alterations in patients affected by alcohol use disorder. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 24(10), 673–682. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.0560
18.
CibeiraN.Lorenzo-LópezL.MasedaA.López-LópezR.Moreno-PeralP.Millán-CalentiJ. C. (2020). Realidad virtual como herramienta de prevención, diagnóstico y tratamiento del deterioro cognitivo en personas mayores: revisión sistemática [Virtual reality as a tool for prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of cognitive impairment in older adults: A systematic review]. Revista de Neurología, 71, 205–212. https://doi.org/10.33588/rn.7106.2020258
19.
ColomboS.HanssonP.NyströmM. B. T. (2023). Mining players experiencia in computer games: immersion affects flow but not presence. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 12, 100334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2023.100334
20.
Delgado-ReyesA.SánchezJ. (2023). Evaluación neuropsicológica y realidad virtual: una revisión sistemática [Neuropsychological assessment and virtual reality: A systematic review]. Informes Psicológicos, 23(1), 108–124. http://dx.doi.org/10.18566/infpsic.v23n1a07
DierschN.WolbersT. (2019). The potential of virtual reality for spatial navigation research across the adult lifespan. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 222(1), Article jeb187252. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.187252
23.
Domic-SiedeM.IraniM.Ramos-HendersonM.CalderónC.OssandónT.Perrone-BertolottiM. (2022). La planificación cognitiva en el contexto de la evaluación neuropsicológica e investigación en neurociencia cognitiva: una revisión sistemática [Cognitive planning in the context of neuropsychological assessment and cognitive neuroscience research: A systematic review]. Terapia Psicológica, 40(3), 367–395. https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-48082022000300367
24.
FabrigarL. R.WegenerD. T.MacCallumR. C.StrahanE. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 272–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272
25.
FergusonH. J.BrunsdonV. E. A.BradfordE. E. F. (2021). The developmental trajectories of executive functions from adolescence to old age. Scientific Reports, 11, Article 1382. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-80866-1
26.
GadermannA. M.GuhnM.ZumboB. D. (2012). Estimating ordinal reliability for Likert-type and ordinal item response data: A conceptual, empirical, and practical guide. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 17(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.7275/n560-j767
27.
GaillardA.FehringD. J.RossellS. L. (2021). A systematic review and meta-analysis of behavioural sex differences in executive control. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 53(2), 519–542. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejn.14946
28.
JonsonM.AvramescuS.ChenD.AlamF. (2021). The role of virtual reality in screening, diagnosing, and rehabilitating spatial memory deficits. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15, Article 628818. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2021.628818
29.
KamińskaD.ZwolińskiG.Laska-LeśniewiczA. (2022). Usability testing of virtual reality applications: The pilot study. Sensors, 22(4), Article 1342. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22041342
30.
KlineP. (1994). An Easy Guide to Factor Analysis. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.
31.
KlingerE.CheminI.LebretonS.y MariéR. M. (2004). A virtual supermarket to assess cognitive planning. Cyberpsychology & behavior, 7(3), 292–293. https://bit.ly/3grVkzm
32.
KourtesisP.CollinaS.DoumasL.MacPhersonS. E. (2021). Validation of the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL): An immersive virtual reality neuropsychological battery with enhanced ecological validity. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 27(2), 181–196. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617720000764
33.
LecavalierN.OuelletÉ.BollerB.BellevilleS. (2020). Use of immersive virtual reality to assess episodic memory: A validation study in older adults. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 30(3), 462–480. https://doi.org/10.1080/09602011.2018.1477684
34.
Lepe-GrajedaJ.delR.Franco-GarzoE. R.de la Cruz-SierraV. E. (2022). Neuropsicología de las funciones ejecutivas [Neuropsychology of executive functions]. Revista Académica CUNZAC, 5(2), 99–106. https://doi.org/10.46780/cunzac.v5i2.76
35.
MaccagnoA.MangeaudA.SomazziC.EsbryN. (2017). La deserción estudiantil en el primer año de la universidad [Student dropout in the first year of university]. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba.
36.
MaldonadoT.OrrJ. M.GoenJ. R. M.BernardJ. A. (2020). Age differences in the subcomponents of executive functioning. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 75(6), e31–e55. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbaa005
37.
MancusoV.SarcinellaE. D.BruniF.ArlatiS.Di SantoS. G.CavalloM.CipressoP.PedroliE. (2024). Systematic review of memory assessment in virtual reality: Evaluating convergent and divergent validity with traditional neuropsychological measures. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 18, Article 1380575. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2024.1380575
38.
MannanF. A.PorffyL. A.JoyceD. W.ShergillS. S.CeliktutanO. (2023). Automatic detection of cognitive impairment with virtual reality. Sensors, 23(2), Article 1026. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23021026
39.
MargulisL. E.Squillace LouhauM. R.FerreresA. R. (2018). Baremo del Trail Making Test para Capital Federal y Gran Buenos Aires [Normative data for the Trail Making Test for Buenos Aires City and Greater Buenos Aires]. Revista Argentina de Ciencias del Comportamiento, 10(3), 54–63. https://doi.org/10.32348/1852.4206.v10.n3.19741
40.
MorenoM.QuerejetaA.GodoyJ. C.Farías-SarquísF.FontanaE.MarengoL.MonteroL. (2022). Revisión de instrumentos de evaluación neurocognitiva validados para población argentina [Review of neurocognitive assessment instruments validated for the Argentine population]. Cuadernos de Neuropsicología, 16(1), 10–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.7714/cnps/16.1.201
41.
MuñizJ.Fonseca-PedreroE. (2019). Diez pasos para la construcción de un test [Ten steps for test construction]. Psicothema, 31(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2018.291
42.
NosekB. A.HardwickeT. E.MoshontzH.AllardA.CorkerK. S.DreberA.FidlerF.HilgardJ.Kline StruhlM.NuijtenM. B.RohrerJ. M.RomeroF.ScheelA. M.SchererL. D.SchönbrodtF. D.VazireS. (2022). Replicability, robustness, and reproducibility in psychological science. Annual Review of Psychology, 73, 719–748. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-114157
43.
ParsonsT. D.PhillipsA. S. (2016). Virtual reality for psychological assessment in clinical practice. Practice Innovations, 1(3), 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1037/pri0000028
44.
PieriL.TosiG.RomanoD. (2023). Virtual reality technology in neuropsychological testing: A systematic review. Journal of Neuropsychology, 17(2), 382–399. https://doi.org/10.1111/jnp.12304
45.
PintoJ. O.DoresA. R.PeixotoB.BarbosaF. (2023). Ecological validity in neurocognitive assessment: Systematized review, content analysis, and proposal of an instrument. Applied Neuropsychology: Adult, 32(2), 577–594. https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2023.2170800
46.
Rebón-OrtizF.ArecesD.Saura-CarrascoM.FloresC.RodríguezC.Díaz-OruetaU.ClimentG.Chicchi GiglioliI. A. (2025). Nesplora Ice Cream test: A normative study of a virtual reality-based executive function assessment in adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 16, Article 1561802. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1561802
47.
RobertsA. C.YeapY. W.SeahH. S.ChanE.SohC.-K.ChristopoulosG. I. (2019). Assessing the suitability of virtual reality for psychological testing. Psychological Assessment, 31(3), 318–328. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000663
48.
RoselliM.JuradoM. B.MatuteE. (2008). Las Funciones Ejecutivas a través de la Vida [Executive functions across the lifespan]. Revista Neuropsicología, Neuropsiquiatría y Neurociencias, 8(1), 23–46. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=3987451
49.
Sánchez-CubilloI.PeriáñezJ. A.Adrover-RoigD.Rodríguez-SánchezJ. M.Ríos-LagoM.TirapuJ.BarcelóF. (2009). Construct validity of the Trail Making Test: Role of task-switching, working memory, inhibition/interference control, and visuomotor abilities. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 15(3), 438–450. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617709090626
50.
SeivaneM. S.BrenllaM. E. (2022). Aplicaciones de la realidad virtual al campo de la evaluación psicológica: una revisión sistemática [Applications of virtual reality to the field of psychological assessment: A systematic review]. Aloma, 40(2), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.51698/aloma.2022.40.2.21-31
51.
ServotteJ. C.GoosseM.CampbellS.DardenneN.PiloteB.SimoneauI.GuilaumeM.BragardI.GhuysenA. (2020). Virtual reality experience: Immersion, sense of presence, and cybersickness. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 38, 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2019.09.006
52.
Simón-VicenteL.Rodríguez-CanoS.Delgado-BenitoV.Ausín-VillaverdeV.Cubo DelgadoE. (2024). Cybersickness. A systematic literature review of adverse effects related to virtual reality. Neurologia, 39(8), 701–709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nrleng.2022.04.007
53.
SjåstadH.BaumeisterR. F. (2018). The future and the will: Planning requires self-control, and ego depletion leads to planning aversion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.01.005
54.
SouchetA.LourdeauxD.PaganiA.RebenitschL. (2023). A narrative review of immersive virtual reality’s ergonomics and risks at the workplace: Cybersickness, visual fatigue, muscular fatigue, acute stress, and mental overload. Virtual Reality, 27, 19–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-022-00672-0
Tirapu-UstárrozJ.Cordero-AndrésP.Luna-LarioP.Hernáez-GoñiP. (2017). Propuesta de un modelo de funciones ejecutivas basado en análisis factoriales [Proposal for a model of executive functions based on factor analyses]. Revista de Neurología, 64(2), 75–84. https://doi.org/10.33588/rn.6402.2016227
57.
WombacherK. (2018). Reliability, Kuder-Richardson formula. In AllenM. (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of communication research methods (pp. 1378–1381). Sage.
58.
ZhuK.ZhangQ.HeB.HuangM.LinR.LiH. (2022). Immersive virtual reality-based cognitive intervention for the improvement of cognitive function, depression, and perceived stress in older adults with mild cognitive impairment and mild dementia: Pilot pre-post study. JMIR Serious Games, 10(1), Article e32117. https://doi.org/10.2196/32117
59.
ZuluetaA.Díaz-OruetaU.Crespo-EguilazN.TorranoF. (2019). Virtual reality-based assessment and rating scales in ADHD diagnosis. Psicología Educativa, 25, 13–22. https://doi.org/10.5093/psed2018a18
