The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Physiological measures of presence in stressful virtual environments
Abstract
A common measure of the quality or effectiveness of a virtual environment (VE) is the mount of presence it evokes in users. Presence is often defined as the sense of being there in a VE. There has been much debate about the best way to measure presence, and presence researchers need, and have sought, a measure that is reliable, valid, sensitive, and objective.We hypothesized that to the degree that a VE seems real, it would evoke physiological responses similar to those evoked by the corresponding real environment, and that greater presence would evoke a greater response. To examine this, we conducted three experiments, the results of which support the use of physiological reaction as a reliable, valid, sensitive, and objective presence measure. The experiments compared participants' physiological reactions to a non-threatening virtual room and their reactions to a stressful virtual height situation. We found that change in heart rate satisfied our requirements for a measure of presence, change in skin conductance did to a lesser extent, and that change in skin temperature did not. Moreover, the results showed that inclusion of a passive haptic element in the VE significantly increased presence and that for presence evoked: 30FPS > 20FPS > 15FPS.
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
Measuring Presence: A Response to the Witmer and Singer Presence Questionnaire
Slater, M. (1999) · Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments · doi:10.1162/105474699566477 · Cited by 855 · cited 1×
“There has been vigorous debate as to how to best measure presence [Barfield et al. 1995; Ellis 1996; Freeman et al. 1998; IJsselsteijn and de Ridder 1998; Lombard and Ditton 1997; Regenbrecht and Schubert 1997; Schubert et al. 1999; Sheridan 1996; Slater 1999; Witmer and Singer 1998].”
Background
Cited by
Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments
Slater, M. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2009.0138 · Cited by 2,691
From presence to consciousness through virtual reality.
Sanchez-Vives, M. V., & Slater, M. (2005) · Nature reviews. Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1651 · Cited by 1,831
Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough?
Bowman, D. A., & McMahan, R. P. (2007) · Computer · doi:10.1109/mc.2007.257 · Cited by 1,375
Virtual reality in neuroscience research and therapy
Bohil, C. J., Alicea, B., & Biocca, F. A. (2011) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn3122 · Cited by 1,108
Presence and Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Are Negatively Related: A Review
Weech, S., Kenny, S., & Barnett-Cowan, M. (2019) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00158 · Cited by 913
Metadata
- Authors
- Meehan, M., Insko, B., Whitton, M., & Brooks, F. P.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 29th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2002-07
- Pages
- 645-652
- OpenAlex
- W2242315049
- Cited by
- 475
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 5.75
- 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: Physiological measures of presence in stressful virtual environments. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/566570.566630
- The paper
- Meehan, M., Insko, B., Whitton, M., & Brooks, F. P. (2002). Physiological measures of presence in stressful virtual environments. Proceedings of the 29th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. https://doi.org/10.1145/566570.566630
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.