Cited by 566Virtual Reality Applications and ImpactsVestibular and auditory disordersAdvanced Optical Imaging Technologies

The virtual reality head-mounted display Oculus Rift induces motion sickness and is sexist in its effects

Munafo, Justin, Diedrick, Meg, Stoffregen, Thomas A.·2017·Experimental Brain Research

Abstract

Anecdotal reports suggest that motion sickness may occur among users of contemporary, consumer-oriented head-mounted display systems and that women may be at greater risk. We evaluated the nauseogenic properties of one such system, the Oculus Rift. The head-mounted unit included motion sensors that were sensitive to users' head movements, such that head movements could be used as control inputs to the device. In two experiments, seated participants played one of two virtual reality games for up to 15 min. In Experiment 1, 22% of participants reported motion sickness, and the difference in incidence between men and women was not significant. In Experiment 2, motion sickness was reported by 56% of participants, and incidence among women (77.78%) was significantly greater than among men (33.33%). Before participants were exposed to the head-mounted display system, we recorded their standing body sway during the performance of simple visual tasks. In both experiments, patterns of pre-exposure body sway differed between participants who (later) reported motion sickness and those who did not. In Experiment 2, sex differences in susceptibility to motion sickness were preceded by sex differences in body sway. These postural effects confirm a prediction of the postural instability theory of motion sickness. The results indicate that users of contemporary head-mounted display systems are at significant risk of motion sickness and that in relation to motion sickness these systems may be sexist in their effects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00221-016-4846-7

Cites

53 of 53 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Munafo, J., Diedrick, M., & Stoffregen, T. A.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Stoffregen, Thomas A.
Venue
Experimental Brain Research
Published
2016-12-03
Volume
235
Issue
3
Pages
889-901
ISSN
  • 0014-4819 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1106
OpenAlex
W2557593045
Cited by
566
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 33 · 2025: 97 · 2024: 71 · 2023: 49 · 2022: 73 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 63 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 9
FWCI
49.35
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy (University of Minnesota) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Media Technology › Advanced Optical Imaging Technologies
Keywords
motion sickness, virtual reality, head-mounted displays, Oculus Rift, sex differences, postural sway, postural control, virtual reality games, consumer technology
MeSH terms
Postural Balance, Female, Humans, Male, Motion Perception, Motion Sickness, Posture, Surveys and Questionnaires, Severity of Illness Index, Sex Characteristics, User-Computer Interface, Video Games, Head Movements, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review