The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification
Abstract
Virtual Reality (VR) sickness can cause intense discomfort, shorten the duration of a VR experience, and create an aversion to further use of VR. High-quality tracking systems can minimize the mismatch between a user's visual perception of the virtual environment (VE) and the response of their vestibular system, diminishing VR sickness for moving users. However, this does not help users who do not or cannot move physically the way they move virtually, because of preference or physical limitations such as a disability. It has been noted that decreasing field of view (FOV) tends to decrease VR sickness, though at the expense of sense of presence. To address this tradeoff, we explore the effect of dynamically, yet subtly, changing a physically stationary person's FOV in response to visually perceived motion as they virtually traverse a VE. We report the results of a two-session, multi-day study with 30 participants. Each participant was seated in a stationary chair, wearing a stereoscopic head-worn display, and used control and FOV-modifying conditions in the same VE. Our data suggests that by strategically and automatically manipulating FOV during a VR session, we can reduce the degree of VR sickness perceived by participants and help them adapt to VR, without decreasing their subjective level of presence, and minimizing their awareness of the intervention.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire
Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998) · Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments · doi:10.1162/105474698565686 · Cited by 6,371
Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness
Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S., & Lilienthal, M. G. (1993) · The International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3 · Cited by 5,457
Duration and Exposure to Virtual Environments: Sickness Curves During and Across Sessions
Kennedy, R. S., Stanney, K. M., & Dunlap, W. P. (2000) · Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments · doi:10.1162/105474600566952 · Cited by 284
Cited by
Eye Tracking in Virtual Reality: a Broad Review of Applications and Challenges
Adhanom, I. B., MacNeilage, P., & Folmer, E. (2023) · Virtual Reality · doi:10.1007/s10055-022-00738-z · Cited by 325
Langbehn, E., Lubos, P., & Steinicke, F. (2018) · Proceedings of the Virtual Reality International Conference - Laval Virtual · doi:10.1145/3234253.3234291 · Cited by 253
Saab, M. M., Hegarty, J., Murphy, D., & Landers, M. (2021) · Nurse Education Today · doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2021.105045 · Cited by 249
On the Usage of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire for Virtual Reality Research
Bimberg, P., Weissker, T., & Kulik, A. (2020) · 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW) · doi:10.1109/vrw50115.2020.00098 · Cited by 226
Virtual Reality Musical Instruments: State of the Art, Design Principles, and Future Directions
Serafin, S., Erkut, C., Kojs, J., Nilsson, N. C., & Nordahl, R. (2016) · Computer Music Journal · doi:10.1162/comj_a_00372 · Cited by 139
Metadata
- Authors
- Fernandes, A. S., & Feiner, S. K.
- Venue
- 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI)
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2016-03
- Pages
- 201-210
- OpenAlex
- W2342688137
- Cited by
- 525
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 30.55
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/3dui.2016.7460053
- The paper
- Fernandes, A. S., & Feiner, S. K. (2016). Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification. 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). https://doi.org/10.1109/3dui.2016.7460053
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.