Sickness in Virtual Reality

Wiederhold, Brenda K.; Bouchard, Stéphane

doi:10.1007/978-1-4899-8023-6_3

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 63 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Stanney et al (56) also suggested that negative side effects differ between immersion in VR and in training simulators. The design of the VE and the task performed are known to have an impact on the induction of negative side effects (3,19,60). Replications of our results in other centers, with diverse populations and methodologies, remain warranted.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The most often reported explanation for symptoms of nausea is a conflict between information provided by the otolith organs (linear acceleration of the head), the semicircular canals (angular acceleration of the head), the visual system (position and Abbreviations: HMD, Head mounted display; SSQ, Simulator Sickness Questionnaire; TSST, Trier Stress Social Test; TSST-G, Trier Stress Social Test in Groups; VE, Virtual environment; VR, Virtual reality. orientation of the body with respect to the visual environment), and the kinesthetic system (limb and body position) (14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19). The sensory conflict theory is not without its critics e.g., (20,21) and other theories may explain some of the nausea symptoms, such as difficulty maintaining postural stability in virtual environments (VEs) (21,22).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Arguing in Favor of Revising the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire Factor Structure When Assessing Side Effects Induced by Immersions in Virtual Reality

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two issues are increasingly of interest in the scientific literature regarding unwanted virtual reality (VR) induced side effects: (1) whether the latent structure of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) is comprised of two or three factors, and (2) if the SSQ measures symptoms of anxiety that can be misattributed to unwanted negative side effects induced by immersions in VR. Study 1 was conducted with a sample of 876 participants. A confirmatory factor analysis clearly supported a two-factor model composed of nausea and oculomotor symptoms instead of the 3-factor structure observed in simulators. To tease-out symptoms of anxiety from unwanted negative side effects induced by immersions in VR, Study 2 was conducted with 88 participants who were administered the Trier Stress Social Test in groups without being immersed in VR. A Spearman correlation showed that 11 out of 16 side effects correlated significantly with anxiety. A factor analysis revealed that items measuring general discomfort, difficulty concentrating, sweating, nausea, and vertigo loaded significantly on the anxiety factor comprised of items from the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Finally, a multiple regression indicated that the items measuring general discomfort and difficulty concentrating significantly predicted increases in anxiety. The overall results support the notion that side effects associated with immersions in VR consist mostly of a nausea and an oculomotor latent structure and that a few items are confounding anxiety and cybersickness. The data support the suggestion to revise the scoring procedures of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire when using this instrument with immersions in VR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arguing in Favor of Revising the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire Factor Structure When Assessing Side Effects Induced by Immersions in Virtual Reality

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As VR technologies become more sophisticated and are more widely employed in a diverse range of therapeutic, educational, professional, and entertainment contexts, it becomes more important to develop coherent and effective approaches to the design of the virtual environments that are accessed through such systems. This is especially true given the fact that even high-quality contemporary VR equipment and well-designed virtual environments can generate unpleasant or harmful effects for users such as "VR sickness" or "cybersickness" involving dry eyes, eye strain, headaches, sweating, muscle aches, nausea, or other physiological responses [7][8][9][10][11][12]. Use of VR equipment may also produce spatial disorientation that can lead to physical accidents, which can raise questions of legal liability for VR platform developers, especially if such accidents were foreseeable and preventable [13].…”

Section: The Potentially Harmful Effects Of Poorly Designed Virtual Ementioning

confidence: 99%

A Phenomenological Framework of Architectural Paradigms for the User-Centered Design of Virtual Environments

Gladden

2018

MTI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In some circumstances, immersion in virtual environments with the aid of virtual reality (VR) equipment can create feelings of anxiety in users and be experienced as something “frightening”, “oppressive”, “alienating”, “dehumanizing”, or “dystopian”. Sometimes (e.g., in exposure therapy or VR gaming), a virtual environment is intended to have such psychological impacts on users; however, such effects can also arise unintentionally due to the environment’s poor architectural design. Designers of virtual environments may employ user-centered design (UCD) to incrementally improve a design and generate a user experience more closely resembling the type desired; however, UCD can yield suboptimal results if an initial design relied on an inappropriate architectural approach. This study developed a framework that can facilitate the purposeful selection of the most appropriate architectural approach by drawing on Norberg-Schulz’s established phenomenological account of real-world architectural modes. By considering the unique possibilities for structuring and experiencing space within virtual environments and reinterpreting Norberg-Schulz’s schemas in the context of virtual environment design, a novel framework was formulated that explicates six fundamental “architectural paradigms” available to designers of virtual environments. It was shown that the application of this framework could easily be incorporated as an additional step within the UCD process.

show abstract

“…In fact, one of the main problems of acting within a virtual environment is that one's visually apparent locomotion within that environment has no counterpart in proprioception, as one typically remains stationary. This lack of isomorphism between D a and D n might lead to irritation or even nausea -an effect that appears to actually increase with the degree of realistic rendering of a natural environment (for a survey of this issue, see Sharples et al 2014).…”

Section: Convergence and Isomorphismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Environments of Intelligence

Greif¹

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preface vii Acknowledgements x 1 Preliminaries: ants and robots, parlour games and steam drills 1 Background 2 Outline 8 Notes 11 PART I Informational environments 13 2 Resurrecting Dretskean information 15 Information, behaviour and probability 15 The content of natural information, and some discontent 20 Alternative views of information 25 Natural information and the roots of intentionality 28 Notes 32 3 Varieties of perception 34 Perception as information processing: the computational view 35 Information specifies affordances: the ecological view 39 Perceptual illusions vs. misperception: the empirical strategy 46 Notes 55 4 The domains of natural information 56 Natural information and reference classes 57 Informational domains 65 Resurrection at last 74 Notes 75 Contents vi Contents 5 Making an environment History, ecology, environment 77 Adapting ecological niches 81 Construction and constitution 87 Notes 91 6 What is an informational environment? Environmental information and the use of cognition 92 What informational environments are 96 How informational environments change 103 Note 106 PART II Environments of intelligence 7 The extension of the extended mind The extension of functional histories 110 The constitution of cognitive extensions 116 Constitutional matters 122 The art of coupling, basic and advanced 124 Notes 128 8 The nature of cognitive artefacts Being guided by pictures 131 Cognitive artefacts and informational environments 136 Convergence and isomorphism 141 Notes 148 9 The intelligence of environments Evolutionary and cognitive robotics 151 Embodied conversational agents and social robotics 155 Second Life 160 Mixed Reality Games 163 Augmented Reality 167 Naturalising the artificial 173 Notes 178 10 Afterthoughts on conceptual analysis and human nature A domain for conceptual analysis 181 A naturalist's view of human nature and machines 187 Bibliography Author Index Subject Index Any serious quest for knowledge is exposed to the risks that come with this openended task.

show abstract

Sickness in Virtual Reality

Cited by 13 publications

References 63 publications

Arguing in Favor of Revising the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire Factor Structure When Assessing Side Effects Induced by Immersions in Virtual Reality

Arguing in Favor of Revising the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire Factor Structure When Assessing Side Effects Induced by Immersions in Virtual Reality

A Phenomenological Framework of Architectural Paradigms for the User-Centered Design of Virtual Environments

Environments of Intelligence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About