A Systematic Review of Physiological Measurements, Factors, Methods, and Applications in Virtual Reality

Abstract

Measurements of physiological parameters provide an objective, often non-intrusive, and (at least semi-)automatic evaluation and utilization of user behavior. In addition, specific hardware devices of Virtual Reality (VR) often ship with built-in sensors, i.e. eye-tracking and movements sensors. Hence, the combination of physiological measurements and VR applications seems promising. Several approaches have investigated the applicability and benefits of this combination for various fields of applications. However, the range of possible application fields, coupled with potentially useful and beneficial physiological parameters, types of sensor, target variables and factors, and analysis approaches and techniques is manifold. This article provides a systematic overview and an extensive state-of-the-art review of the usage of physiological measurements in VR. We identified 1,119 works that make use of physiological measurements in VR. Within these, we identified 32 approaches that focus on the classification of characteristics of experience, common in VR applications. The first part of this review categorizes the 1,119 works by field of application, i.e. therapy, training, entertainment, and communication and interaction, as well as by the specific target factors and variables measured by the physiological parameters. An additional category summarizes general VR approaches applicable to all specific fields of application since they target typical VR qualities. In the second part of this review, we analyze the target factors and variables regarding the respective methods used for an automatic analysis and, potentially, classification. For example, we highlight which measurement setups have been proven to be sensitive enough to distinguish different levels of arousal, valence, anxiety, stress, or cognitive workload in the virtual realm. This work may prove useful for all researchers wanting to use physiological data in VR and who want to have a good overview of prior approaches taken, their benefits and potential drawbacks.

Heart rate variability in marketing research: A systematic review and methodological perspectives

“…The fifth and sixth avenues address the correlation between heart rate variability and immersive and neurophysiological tools. In recent years, heart rate variability has been increasingly used in many fields to complement mixed reality systems (Halbig & Latoschik, 2021). Virtual reality enables consumer researchers to depict a variety of real‐world situations with a suitable level of details, contextual elements, and sensory information, which allows for high ecological validity during experimentation.…”

“…The fifth and sixth avenues address the correlation between heart rate variability and immersive and neurophysiological tools. In recent years, heart rate variability has been increasingly used in many fields to complement mixed reality systems (Halbig & Latoschik, 2021).…”

Review of Virtual Reality (VR) Applications To Enhance Chemical Safety: From Students to Plant Operators

“…The advancements in sensor technology have enabled researchers to get critical insights into human performance and experience, not possible through conventional approaches. Therefore, the inclusion of physiological sensors to obtain information about the user performance and experience in the virtual world can complement the existing approaches to assess training and knowledge transfer in virtual reality. , Physiological metrics can be used in evaluating user performance and experience in each of the environments, i.e., virtual, habituation, and real environments. Any differences revealed by these metrics can provide critical insights into the factors that can enhance VR effectiveness.…”

Cybersickness Variability by Race: Findings From 6 Studies and a Mini Meta-analysis (Preprint)

“…As medical VR technologies have become more commonplace, cybersickness has transitioned from a nuisance to a potential safety and efficacy concern. Cybersickness concerns have prompted researchers [11][12][13][14], professional groups [15], standards organizations [16], and the US Food and Drug Administration [17] to address prevention, assessment, and mitigation strategies.…”