Application of Mixed Reality Technologies in Autism Treatment and Neurodiversity Support

Abstract

This comprehensive review explores the application of Mixed Reality (MR) technologies in treating Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and supporting people with neurodiversity. It examines the potential of MR to create immersive, personalized interventions for social skills training, communication enhancement, and behavioral therapy. The paper discusses the technical considerations in implementing MR systems, including hardware requirements, software development, and user interface design tailored for neurodiverse individuals. It also addresses the challenges and future directions in this field, including ethical considerations, the need for clinical validation, and the integration of MR with existing therapeutic approaches. By synthesizing current research and identifying areas for future investigation, this review highlights the transformative potential of MR in revolutionizing ASD therapy and support.

Introduction

I. INTRODUCTION

Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) is a complex neurodevelopmental condition that affects approximately 1 in 36 children in the United States, according to recent estimates [1]. Characterized by a wide range of challenges in social interaction, communication, and restricted or repetitive behaviors, ASD presents a unique set of obstacles for individuals, families, and healthcare providers. The heterogeneity of ASD is particularly striking, with symptoms and severity varying greatly from one individual to another. This diversity underscores the critical need for personalized interventions that can adapt to the specific needs of each person on the autism spectrum.

Traditional therapeutic approaches, while valuable, often struggle to address the multifaceted nature of ASD fully. Technological advancements have recently opened new avenues for intervention and support. Among these, Mixed Reality (MR) has emerged as a particularly promising tool. MR technology seamlessly blends physical and digital environments and offers a unique platform for creating immersive, interactive, and highly customizable experiences [2].

The potential of MR in addressing the challenges associated with ASD is significant. By providing controlled, safe environments for practicing social skills, communication, and behavioral regulation, MR can offer engaging and therapeutic experiences. Moreover, the adaptability of MR systems allows for fine-tuning of interventions to match each individual's specific needs and preferences, addressing the heterogeneous nature of ASD.

As research in this field progresses, MR is increasingly being recognized not just as a supplementary tool, but as a transformative technology that could fundamentally change how we approach ASD therapy and support. This introduction sets the stage for a deeper exploration of how MR is applied in ASD interventions, the technical considerations involved, and the potential future directions of this rapidly evolving field.

II. MIXED REALITY: AN OVERVIEW

A. Definition and Technical Aspects

Mixed Reality (MR) represents a revolutionary paradigm in human-computer interaction, offering a seamless blend of the physical and digital worlds. It refers to creating new environments where physical and virtual objects coexist and interact in real-time [3]. This technology sits on a continuum between the real world and fully immersive virtual environments, encompassing Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR) technologies.

At its core, MR utilizes sophisticated technologies to achieve its immersive effects. Advanced display technologies, such as head-mounted displays (HMDs) or smart glasses, serve as the primary interface between the user and the mixed environment. These displays often incorporate high-resolution screens, wide field-of-view optics, and stereoscopic 3D capabilities to create convincing visual overlays or fully immersive experiences.

Sensors play a crucial role in MR systems, allowing for precise tracking of the user's movements and interactions within the environment. These may include accelerometers, gyroscopes, magnetometers for orientation tracking, depth sensors, and cameras for spatial mapping and gesture recognition. The integration of these sensors enables the MR system to understand and respond to the user's physical context in real-time.

Computer vision algorithms form another critical component of MR technology. These algorithms process visual data from cameras and sensors to recognize objects, track markers, and map the physical environment. This allows virtual elements to be accurately placed and oriented within the real world, maintaining the illusion of seamless integration between physical and digital realms.

B. Advantages in Therapeutic Settings

The controlled and immersive nature of MR environments offers several significant advantages in therapeutic settings, particularly for individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) and other neurodevelopmental conditions [4]:

1. Customizability: MR platforms allow for creating scenarios that can be precisely tailored to individual needs and preferences. This level of personalization is particularly valuable in ASD therapy, where each individual may have unique challenges and learning styles. Therapists can adjust parameters such as visual complexity, audio cues, and interaction mechanisms to create optimal learning environments for each user.
2. Safety: One of the most compelling advantages of MR in therapy is the ability to practice skills in a risk-free environment. For individuals with ASD who may experience anxiety or overstimulation in real-world social situations, MR provides a safe space to practice and develop social skills without the fear of real-world consequences. This can help build confidence and reduce anxiety associated with social interactions.
3. Repeatability: MR environments allow for consistent repetition of therapeutic exercises, which is crucial for skill acquisition and reinforcement. Unlike real-world scenarios that may vary unpredictably, MR scenarios can be replicated exactly, allowing individuals to practice specific skills under controlled conditions as many times as needed.
4. Data Collection: MR systems excel in their capacity for detailed data collection and analysis. Every interaction within the MR environment can be recorded, providing therapists with a wealth of quantitative and qualitative data on the user's performance, progress, and areas of difficulty. This data can be used to track progress over time, identify specific challenges, and inform the development of personalized treatment plans.

These advantages collectively position MR as a powerful tool in therapeutic settings, offering unprecedented opportunities for personalized, engaging, and effective interventions for individuals with ASD and other neurodevelopmental conditions.

Table 1: Advantages of Mixed Reality in Therapeutic Settings for ASD [3, 4]

III. APPLICATIONS IN AUTISM TREATMENT

A. Social Skills Training

Mixed Reality (MR) technology offers unprecedented opportunities for social skills training in individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). By simulating realistic social scenarios, MR allows individuals to practice and refine their social interactions within a controlled, safe environment [5]. These simulations can range from basic one-on-one conversations to complex group interactions, mimicking real-world situations such as classroom discussions, job interviews, or casual social gatherings.

One of the key advantages of MR in social skills training is the ability to gradually increase the complexity of scenarios. This progressive approach allows individuals to build confidence and competence at their own pace. For instance, a training program might start with simple greetings and turn-taking in conversation, then advance to more nuanced aspects of social interaction such as understanding facial expressions, interpreting tone of voice, and recognizing social cues.

MR simulations can be designed to focus on specific social challenges commonly faced by individuals with ASD, such as maintaining eye contact, interpreting body language, or understanding sarcasm and figurative language. By providing immediate feedback and the opportunity for repeated practice, MR helps reinforce positive behaviors and promotes skill generalization – the ability to apply learned skills in various real-world contexts.

B. Communication Enhancement

Interactive MR experiences offer powerful tools for enhancing both verbal and non-verbal communication skills in individuals with ASD. These experiences can be structured to address various aspects of communication, from basic language skills to more complex conversational abilities.

For verbal communication, MR environments can provide engaging contexts for vocabulary building, sentence construction, and narrative skills. For example, interactive storytelling experiences in MR can encourage individuals to describe scenes, narrate events, and engage in dialogue with virtual characters, thereby improving their expressive language skills.

Non-verbal communication, often a significant challenge for individuals with ASD, can be addressed through MR by providing visual cues and feedback on aspects such as facial expressions, gestures, and body posture. MR systems can use motion capture technology to analyze the user's non-verbal cues and provide real-time guidance on how to improve these aspects of communication.

Moreover, MR can simulate various social contexts, allowing individuals to practice adjusting their communication style based on the situation – a crucial skill for social adaptability. This might include practicing formal versus informal language, or adjusting tone and volume of speech in different scenarios.

C. Behavioral Therapy

MR environments offer unique advantages in behavioral therapy for individuals with ASD. These virtual spaces can be meticulously designed to address specific behavioral challenges, providing a controlled setting for intervention and skill development [6].

One of the primary benefits of using MR in behavioral therapy is the ability to provide immediate feedback and reinforcement. For instance, in addressing challenges related to impulse control or attention, MR environments can be programmed to deliver instant visual or auditory cues in response to the user's actions. This immediate feedback helps in reinforcing positive behaviors and discouraging undesirable ones.

MR can also be employed to create exposure therapy scenarios for individuals who struggle with specific phobias or anxieties. By gradually exposing the individual to anxiety-provoking situations in a controlled MR environment, therapists can help desensitize the individual and develop coping strategies.

Furthermore, MR environments can be designed to target specific behavioral goals, such as improving executive functioning skills like planning, organization, and time management. Interactive MR games and activities can be created to enhance these skills in engaging and motivating ways.

The data collection capabilities of MR systems are particularly valuable in behavioral therapy. Detailed metrics on user performance and behavior can be gathered during each session, allowing therapists to track progress over time, identify patterns, and adjust treatment plans accordingly. This data-driven approach enables more personalized and effective interventions.

Fig. 1: Effectiveness of Mixed Reality Interventions for ASD [5, 6]

IV. SUPPORTING NEURODIVERSITY

A. Personalized Learning Experiences

Mixed Reality (MR) technologies have emerged as powerful tools for creating personalized learning experiences that support neurodiversity. By leveraging the flexibility and adaptability of MR environments, educators and therapists can tailor learning experiences to accommodate diverse cognitive styles and sensory preferences [7].

MR platforms allow for the creation of highly customizable learning environments that can be adjusted in real-time based on individual needs. For instance, visual learners can benefit from rich, interactive 3D visualizations of complex concepts, while auditory learners might receive enhanced audio cues and explanations. Kinesthetic learners can engage with virtual objects and environments in ways that reinforce learning through movement and interaction.

The adaptive nature of MR technologies enables the implementation of dynamic difficulty adjustment in educational content. As learners progress through tasks, the system can automatically adjust the complexity, pace, and type of challenges presented, ensuring that each individual is working at their optimal level of engagement and challenge. This approach helps prevent frustration and boredom, two common barriers to effective learning, especially for neurodiverse individuals.

Furthermore, MR environments can incorporate multiple modes of input and output, accommodating different communication preferences and abilities. For example, a learner who struggles with written communication might use voice commands or gesture controls to interact with the MR environment, while receiving visual or haptic feedback.

The data collection capabilities of MR systems also contribute to personalized learning experiences. By continuously monitoring user interactions and performance, MR platforms can build detailed learner profiles over time. This data can be used to identify patterns in learning styles, track progress, and inform the ongoing refinement of personalized learning strategies.

B. Sensory Integration

For individuals with sensory processing difficulties, which are common in various neurodevelopmental conditions, MR offers unique opportunities for sensory integration and desensitization in controlled, safe environments [8].

MR can provide carefully calibrated sensory experiences that can be gradually adjusted in intensity and complexity. This allows individuals to explore and adapt to different sensory inputs at their own pace, without the risk of overwhelming stimulation that might occur in real-world environments.

Visual sensitivities, for instance, can be addressed through MR environments that allow for fine-tuning of light levels, color intensity, and visual complexity. Individuals can practice coping with different visual scenarios, from calm, muted environments to more stimulating, colorful ones, building tolerance and adaptive strategies over time.

For auditory processing challenges, MR can offer controlled acoustic environments where volume, pitch, and complexity of sounds can be precisely managed. This can help individuals learn to filter and process auditory information more effectively, a crucial skill for navigating noisy or unpredictable real-world settings.

Tactile sensitivities can also be addressed through haptic feedback systems integrated into MR experiences. These can provide controlled tactile stimuli, allowing individuals to explore different textures and pressures in a safe, virtual context.

Moreover, MR can simulate multisensory environments that combine visual, auditory, and tactile elements in controlled ways. This is particularly valuable for individuals who struggle with sensory integration, as it allows them to practice processing multiple sensory inputs simultaneously in a manageable setting.

The immersive nature of MR also makes it an effective tool for exposure therapy, helping individuals gradually acclimate to sensory experiences they find challenging. For example, someone with aversions to specific textures or sounds can be slowly exposed to these stimuli in a virtual environment, building tolerance over time.

By providing these controlled, customizable sensory experiences, MR technology supports the development of coping strategies and sensory integration skills that can significantly improve an individual's ability to navigate and engage with the physical world.

Fig. 2: Effectiveness of Mixed Reality in Addressing Neurodiverse Learning and Sensory Needs [7, 8]

V. TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

A. Hardware Requirements

The implementation of Mixed Reality (MR) systems for therapeutic purposes necessitates a careful consideration of hardware components. The choice of hardware significantly impacts the user experience, immersion level, and therapeutic efficacy of MR applications.

Head-mounted displays (HMDs) are at the forefront of MR hardware. These devices range from fully immersive virtual reality headsets to see-through augmented reality glasses. For therapeutic applications, the selection of an appropriate HMD depends on factors such as field of view, resolution, refresh rate, and comfort during extended use. High-resolution displays with wide fields of view enhance immersion and visual fidelity, crucial for realistic social scenarios and sensory experiences. Low latency and high refresh rates are essential to minimize motion sickness and maintain user comfort, particularly important for individuals with sensory sensitivities [9].

Motion tracking systems are integral to creating interactive MR experiences. These systems can be categorized into outside-in tracking, which uses external cameras or sensors to track the user's movements, and inside-out tracking, where sensors on the HMD itself track the environment and the user's position within it. The choice between these depends on factors such as the required precision, the size of the interactive space, and the need for portability in therapeutic settings.

Haptic feedback devices add another dimension to MR experiences by providing tactile sensations. These can range from handheld controllers with basic vibration feedback to more advanced systems like haptic gloves or bodysuits. In therapeutic contexts, haptic feedback can be particularly valuable for sensory integration training and enhancing the realism of social interaction scenarios.

Additional hardware considerations may include eye-tracking technology for precise gaze analysis in social skills training, and high-quality audio systems for immersive soundscapes and clear communication in language development applications.

B. Software Development

The development of MR applications for therapeutic purposes requires specialized software frameworks and development tools. These tools must support the creation of highly interactive, customizable, and data-rich environments suited to therapeutic needs.

Game engines such as Unity and Unreal Engine have become popular platforms for MR development due to their robust 3D rendering capabilities, physics simulations, and cross-platform support. These engines provide developers with high-level tools for creating immersive environments and interactive experiences without the need for low-level graphics programming.

MR-specific software development kits (SDKs) play a crucial role in bridging the gap between hardware capabilities and software applications. SDKs like Microsoft's Mixed Reality Toolkit for Unity, ARCore for Android, and ARKit for iOS provide developers with pre-built components for common MR functionalities such as spatial mapping, gesture recognition, and voice input.

For therapeutic applications, additional specialized software tools may be necessary. These might include frameworks for real-time data analytics to track user progress, AI modules for adaptive content delivery, and specialized libraries for creating social avatars with realistic facial expressions and body language.

C. User Interface Design

Designing user interfaces (UI) and user experiences (UX) for neurodiverse users in MR environments presents unique challenges and opportunities. The goal is to create interfaces that are intuitive, accessible, and adaptable to a wide range of cognitive and sensory profiles [10].

Key principles in UI/UX design for neurodiverse users include:

1. Clarity and Simplicity: Interfaces should be clean and uncluttered, with clear visual hierarchies and minimal distractions. This is particularly important for users who may struggle with sensory overload or attention difficulties.
2. Customizability: Allowing users to adjust interface elements such as color schemes, font sizes, and audio levels can help accommodate individual sensory preferences and needs.
3. Consistent and Predictable Interactions: Maintaining consistency in interaction patterns across the application helps users build familiarity and reduces cognitive load.
4. Multi-modal Feedback: Providing feedback through multiple sensory channels (visual, auditory, haptic) ensures that information is accessible to users with different sensory processing abilities.
5. Scalable Complexity: Interfaces should be designed to scale in complexity, allowing users to start with simple interactions and gradually progress to more complex ones as they become more comfortable with the system.
6. Error Forgiveness: Implementing forgiving interfaces that allow for easy error correction and provide clear guidance on how to recover from mistakes.
7. Intuitive Gestures and Voice Commands: Utilizing natural and intuitive gestures or voice commands can make interactions more accessible, especially for users who may struggle with traditional input methods.
8. Visual Supports: Incorporating visual aids, such as icons, symbols, and visual schedules, can enhance understanding and navigation for users who benefit from visual processing.

By carefully considering these technical aspects – from hardware selection to software development and UI/UX design – developers can create MR experiences that are not only therapeutically effective but also engaging and accessible to neurodiverse users.

Table 2: Importance and Complexity of Technical Aspects in MR Development for Neurodiversity Support [9, 10]

VI. CHALLENGES AND FUTURE DIRECTIONS

A. Ethical Considerations

The application of Mixed Reality (MR) technologies in therapeutic contexts, particularly for vulnerable populations such as individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), raises significant ethical considerations that must be carefully addressed.

Privacy concerns are paramount in MR applications, as these systems often collect extensive personal data, including behavioral patterns, physiological responses, and even eye-tracking information. This data, while valuable for therapeutic purposes, is highly sensitive and requires robust protection measures. There is a need for clear guidelines on data collection, storage, and usage, ensuring compliance with regulations such as GDPR in Europe or HIPAA in the United States [11].

Data protection extends beyond mere storage security. It's crucial to consider the potential for data breaches and the implications of such breaches for vulnerable users. Additionally, there are concerns about the long-term storage of data and the right to be forgotten, particularly as individuals progress through therapy and potentially outgrow the need for certain interventions.

The ethical implications of using MR technologies with vulnerable populations are multifaceted. There's a risk of over-reliance on technology, potentially at the expense of human interaction and real-world skill development. It's essential to strike a balance between technological intervention and traditional therapeutic approaches.

Another ethical consideration is the potential for unintended consequences. For instance, while MR environments can provide safe spaces for practicing social skills, there's a risk that users might become too comfortable in these controlled environments, potentially hindering their ability to generalize skills to real-world situations.

Informed consent is another critical ethical issue, particularly when working with individuals who may have cognitive differences or communication challenges. It's crucial to develop appropriate methods for explaining the nature of MR interventions and obtaining meaningful consent from both users and their caregivers.

B. Clinical Validation

While the potential of MR in therapeutic contexts is promising, there is a pressing need for rigorous clinical validation to establish its efficacy and develop best practices. Current research in this field, while encouraging, often suffers from small sample sizes, lack of control groups, and short-term follow-up periods.

Large-scale, longitudinal clinical trials are necessary to conclusively demonstrate the effectiveness of MR interventions across diverse populations within the autism spectrum. These trials should not only measure immediate outcomes but also assess long-term benefits and potential side effects of prolonged MR use.

Standardization of MR interventions is another challenge that needs addressing. The variety of hardware and software combinations currently in use makes it difficult to compare results across studies. Developing standardized protocols and assessment tools specific to MR interventions would greatly enhance the ability to conduct meta-analyses and draw broader conclusions about efficacy.

There's also a need for research into the optimal duration and frequency of MR interventions. Questions remain about how much exposure is beneficial and whether there are diminishing returns or potential negative effects from overuse.

Another area requiring further investigation is the generalization of skills learned in MR environments to real-world situations. While some studies have shown promising results in this regard, more comprehensive research is needed to understand the factors that facilitate or hinder skill transfer [12].

C. Integration with Existing Therapies

The integration of MR technologies with existing therapeutic approaches represents both a challenge and an opportunity. The goal is not to replace traditional therapies but to enhance and complement them, creating a more comprehensive and effective treatment approach.

One potential integration model is using MR as a preparatory tool before real-world interventions. For instance, individuals could practice social scenarios in MR environments before engaging in actual social situations, potentially reducing anxiety and improving outcomes.

MR can also be used to augment traditional therapy sessions. Therapists could use MR environments to create controlled scenarios that are difficult to replicate in traditional settings, allowing for more targeted interventions.

Home-based MR interventions offer another avenue for integration, potentially extending the reach of therapy beyond clinical settings. However, this approach requires careful consideration of how to maintain therapeutic integrity and provide appropriate support in non-clinical environments.

The role of therapists in MR-enhanced interventions is another area requiring exploration. While MR can automate certain aspects of therapy, the expertise of human therapists remains crucial in interpreting results, adjusting interventions, and providing emotional support.

Interdisciplinary collaboration between MR developers, clinicians, and researchers will be key to successful integration. This collaboration should focus on developing MR tools that align with established therapeutic principles while leveraging the unique capabilities of the technology.

As MR technologies continue to evolve, ongoing research and clinical trials will be essential to refine integration strategies and establish best practices for combining MR with traditional therapeutic approaches.

Conclusion

Mixed Reality technologies offer unprecedented opportunities for creating personalized, engaging, and effective interventions for individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder and other neurodevelopmental conditions. While the potential benefits are significant, challenges remain in terms of ethical considerations, clinical validation, and integration with existing therapies. As the field progresses, interdisciplinary collaboration between technologists, clinicians, and researchers will be crucial in refining MR interventions and establishing best practices. The continued evolution of MR technologies, coupled with rigorous research and thoughtful implementation, has the potential to significantly improve outcomes for individuals with ASD, enhancing their quality of life and promoting greater inclusion in society. As we move forward, it is essential to maintain a balance between technological innovation and human-centered care, ensuring that MR interventions complement rather than replace traditional therapeutic approaches.

References

[1] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, \"Data & Statistics on Autism Spectrum Disorder,\" 2023. [Online]. Available: https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/data.html [2] P. Milgram and F. Kishino, \"A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays,\" IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, vol. E77-D, no. 12, pp. 1321-1329, 1994. [Online]. Available: https://cs.gmu.edu/~zduric/cs499/Readings/r76JBo-Milgram_IEICE_1994.pdf [3] P. Milgram and F. Kishino, \"A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays,\" IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, vol. E77-D, no. 12, pp. 1321-1329, 1994. [Online]. Available: https://cs.gmu.edu/~zduric/cs499/Readings/r76JBo-Milgram_IEICE_1994.pdf [4] S. Parsons and S. Cobb, \"State-of-the-art of virtual reality technologies for children on the autism spectrum,\" European Journal of Special Needs Education, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 355-366, 2011. [Online]. Available: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08856257.2011.593831 [5] L. Boccanfuso et al., \"A low-cost socially assistive robot and robot-assisted intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder: field trials and lessons learned,\" Autonomous Robots, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 637-655, 2017. [Online]. Available: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10514-016-9554-4 [6] S. Parsons, \"Authenticity in Virtual Reality for assessment and intervention in autism: A conceptual review,\" Educational Research Review, vol. 19, pp. 138-157, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X16300276 [7] M. Lytridis, C. Bazinas, G. Sidiropoulos, C. Papakostas, V. Kaburlasos, E. Vrochidou, V. Karastergios, E. Papadopoulou, S. Nikolaou, and S. Ioannidis, \"On Measuring Engagement Level During Child-Robot Interaction in Education,\" in Robotics in Education, Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020, pp. 3-13. [Online]. Available: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-26945-6_1 [8] L. Escobedo, M. Tentori, E. Quintana, J. Favela, and D. Garcia-Rosas, \"Using Augmented Reality to Help Children with Autism Stay Focused,\" IEEE Pervasive Computing, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 38-46, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6756701 [9] M. Slater and S. Wilbur, \"A Framework for Immersive Virtual Environments (FIVE): Speculations on the Role of Presence in Virtual Environments,\" Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 603-616, 1997. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.6.603 [10] A. Ismail, K. A. Hsiao, and S. S. Boys, \"Designing for autism: an ASPECTSS™ framework,\" in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Software Development and Technologies for Enhancing Accessibility and Fighting Info-exclusion, 2016, pp. 1-8. [Online]. Available: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3019943.3019944 [11] S. Gallagher, R. Risto, and J. Marko, \"Mixed reality and the ethical challenges of virtual environments,\" IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 34-42, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/9378790 [12] S. Parsons, \"Authenticity in Virtual Reality for assessment and intervention in autism: A conceptual review,\" Educational Research Review, vol. 19, pp. 138-157, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1747938X16300276

Copyright

Copyright © 2024 Somit Bhattacharya. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.