Design recommendations for the development of virtual reality focusing on the elderly

Participants in 11/13 of the studies reported issues with the HMD, including that it was too heavy, caused general discomfort, caused disorientation and imbalance, and caused feelings of being trapped, confined, afraid, or anxious.

“Participants in 11/13 of the studies reported issues with the HMD, including that it was too heavy [9,44,45,48,50]; caused general discomfort [9,15,16,44,50]; caused disorientation and imbalance [44,46]; and caused feelings of being trapped, confined [45], afraid, or anxious [16,45].”

11/13 of the studies described feedback on the content presented, with participants preferring still content to moving content, preferring familiar content similar to past experiences, showing a strong preference for tailoring content to their own interests, enjoying the adaptive nature of the content, suggesting more diversity in content, and giving only a few negative comments about content.

“A total of 11/13 of the studies described feedback on the content presented, specifically the various objects and scenes inside the virtual environment and participants’ experiences navigating them [9,14-16,44,46-48,50-52]. Participants preferred still content to moving content [44,51] and preferred content that was familiar [52], in particular, content similar to past experiences in real life [44”

Perceptions of the audiovisual quality of IVR hardware varied across studies, with 5/13 of the studies reporting some form of audiovisual issue such as volume not being at the right level or not clear enough, or sound from the physical environment negatively affecting the IVR experience.

“Perceptions of the audiovisual quality of IVR hardware varied across studies [14,16,45,48-52]. A total of 5/13 of the studies reported some form of audiovisual issue [14,45,49-51], with feedback that the volume was not at the right level or was not clear enough [45,49-51] or that sound coming from the physical environment could negatively affect the IVR experience [45].”

Difficulties with the HMD being too small to wear with glasses were described.

“Difficulties with the HMD being too small to wear with glasses were also described [14,44,46,48,50,51].”

In 4/13 of the studies, participants had little issue navigating the virtual environments, found it easier to interact after a few practice attempts and once the equipment was fitted correctly, and were able to interact with virtual objects such as other virtual avatars.

“In 4/13 of the studies that described participants’ experiences navigating the virtual environments, participants had little issue in doing so [44,48,50,52]. Participants found it easier to interact with the virtual environment after a few practice attempts [52] and also once the equipment was fitted correctly as this enabled them to focus on using the handheld controllers [50]. Participants were”

The physical capabilities of the participants influenced their experience with IVR, with impaired hearing or vision hindering the experience, a lack of mobility preventing some from making the most of the full 360° experience, and some finding it difficult to turn themselves to see other features in the environment.

“The physical capabilities of the participants and how that influenced their experience with IVR were also reported [9,15,16,44,47,48,50,51]. Having impaired hearing or vision hindered the participants’ experience with IVR [16,50,51]. A lack of mobility also prevented some participants from making the most of the full 360° experience [9,47,48,50], where some found it difficult to turn themselves to”

There was a temporal pattern in older adults' perceptions of IVR across stages of use, illustrating the importance of users' preconceptions and how they can differ from actual experience, with a generally negative impression before use changing to a generally positive impression after use.

“There was a temporal pattern identified in the data that consisted of older adults’ perceptions of IVR across stages of IVR use (perceptions of IVR [9,14-16,44-52]). It began with older adults’ perceptions of IVR before use, followed by their perceptions during and immediately after use. This pattern illustrates the importance of users’ preconceptions of a given technology and how they can differ”

10/13 of the studies reported participants' experiences and perceptions of presence and immersion in IVR, with participants reporting that the feeling of presence made the experience feel more real and allowed them to engage with objects as if they were really present, 3/13 explicitly reporting enjoying the experience of presence, and 1/13 reporting some feelings of anxiety and nervousness because

“A total of 10/13 of the studies reported participants’ experiences and perceptions of presence and immersion in IVR [9,14-16,46,48-52]. Participants reported that the feeling of presence made the experience feel more real [15] and allowed them to engage with objects in the virtual environment as if they were really present [9]. Participants from 3/13 of the studies explicitly reported enjoying the”

Feedback provided by participants during and after use was mostly positive, with participants excited and curious about IVR, some saying it was a technology missing from their life, novelty identified as a distinct pattern usually referring to unique features and positive experiences, and a number of negative responses including preference for technologies without HMD, having enough devices, and

“Feedback provided by participants during and after use was mostly positive [9,14,16,46,48,49,51]. Authors from 1/13 of the studies reported that participants were excited and curious about IVR and were keen to learn about its potential benefits [14]. A participant from another study went as far as to say that it was a technology that had been missing from their life [9]. Novelty experienced in IVR”

1/13 of the studies reported that the more participants were immersed in the virtual environment, the more it enhanced their experience, greater immersion provided a heightened travel experience, enabled escape from reality, and simulated past experiences realistically, while some participants were not convinced and felt like passive observers, and participants needed to interact with content and

“A total of 1/13 of the studies reported that the more participants were immersed in the virtual environment, the more it enhanced their experience [48]. Greater immersion provided a heightened travel experience when exploring places around the world [15,16], enabled participants to escape from their own reality [50], and simulated past experiences in a realistic way [49]. Some participants were”

Conflicting participant experiences were present across the synthesis, including differences in experiences of dizziness and nausea, wearing the HMD, and sitting while using IVR.

“Conflicting participant experiences were present across the synthesis. These conflicts included differences in older adults’ experiences of dizziness and nausea [14,44], wearing the HMD [9,14,15,44,46,48,50,51], and sitting while using IVR [15,44,50].”