Vection Change Exacerbates Simulator Sickness in Virtual Environments
Abstract
The optic flow patterns generated by virtual reality (VR) systems typically produce visually induced experiences of self-motion (vection). While this vection can enhance presence in VR, it is often accompanied by a variant of motion sickness called simulator sickness (SS). However, not all vection experiences are the same. In terms of perceived heading and/or speed, visually simulated self-motion can be either steady or changing. It was hypothesized that changing vection would lead to more SS. Participants viewed an optic flow pattern that either steadily expanded or alternately expanded and contracted. In one experiment, SS was measured pretreatment and after 5 min of viewing using the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire. In a second experiment employing the same stimuli, vection onset and magnitude were measured using a computer-interfaced slide indicator. The steadily expanding flow pattern, compared to the expanding and contracting pattern, led to: 1) significantly less SS, 2) lower subscores for nausea, oculomotor, and disorientation symptoms, 3) more overall vection magnitude, and 4) less changing vection. Collectively, these results suggest that changing vection exacerbates SS.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Bonato et al. (2008) found that participants exposed to an alternately expanding/contracting optic flow field reported significantly less vection, more frequent changes in vection, and increased VIMS compared to participants exposed to a constantly expanding field, who reported more compelling and longer-lasting vection and significantly reduced VIMS.
“Results showed that the second group reported significantly less vection in total, more frequent changes in vection (i.e., alternating vection onset and offset), and increased VIMS, whereas the first group experienced more compelling and longer-lasting feelings of vection and significantly reduced VIMS.”
From Vection and visually induced motion sickness: how are they related? (2015) · cites this paper as Bonato et al., 2008
Cites
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 · see citing works
Motion sickness: a synthesis and evaluation of the sensory conflict theory
Oman, C. M. (1990) · Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology · doi:10.1139/y90-044 · Cited by 480 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
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 · see citing works
Vection and visually induced motion sickness: how are they related?
Keshavarz, B., Riecke, B. E., Hettinger, L. J., & Campos, J. L. (2015) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00472 · Cited by 325 · see citing works
“Similarly, Bonato et al. (2008) compared two groups of participants: the first group was exposed to a constantly expanding optic flow field (less visualvestibular conflict due to a lack of acceleration in the motion profile), whereas the second group was exposed to an optic flow field that…”
Result
- Authors
- Bonato, F., Bubka, A., Palmisano, S., Phillip, D., & Moreno, G.
- Affiliations
- Department of Psychology, Saint Peter's College, 2641 Kennedy Boulevard, Jersey City, NJ 07306
- School of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, New South Wales, 2522 Australia
- Department of Psychology, Saint Peter's College, Jersey City, NJ 07306
- Venue
- Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments
- Publisher
- MIT Press - Journals
- Published
- 2008-06-01
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 283-292
- ISSN
- 1054-7460
- Cited by
- 97
- References
- 2
- Language
- en
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