Driving Simulator Sickness: An Evidence-Based Review of the Literature
Abstract
OBJECTIVE. Guided by the Occupational Therapy Practice Framework: Domain and Process (2nd edition; American Occupational Therapy Association, 2008 ) , we conducted an evidence-based review on simulator sickness (SS). METHOD. We searched Web of Science, PubMed, SafetyLit, Google Scholar, and recently published literature. We used the American Academy of Neurology’s classification criteria to extract data from 10 studies and assign each a level of 1–4, with “1” indicating the highest level of evidence. We grouped studies that addressed SS into client factors, context and environment factors, and activity demands. RESULTS. Client factors (i.e., older clients [>70 yr; Level B], women [Level B]) and context/environment factors (e.g., refresh rates, scenario design and duration, simulator configuration, and calibration; Level B) probably increase the rates of SS, whereas activity demands (vection, speed of driving, and postural instability; Level C) possibly contribute to SS. CONCLUSION. We classified factors contributing to SS and identified the need for randomized trials to identify causes of 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?
The occurrence of VIMS is tightly linked to the occurrence of vection, in the sense that VIMS does not seem to occur in participants who do not perceive vection.
“These and other results (e.g., Lee et al., 1997; Stoffregen and Smart, 1998; Classen et al., 2011) indicate that the occurrence of VIMS is tightly linked to the occurrence of vection, in the sense that VIMS does not seem to occur in participants who do not perceive vection.”
From Vection and visually induced motion sickness: how are they related? (2015) · cites this paper as Classen et al., 2011
Cites
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
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
- Authors
- Classen, S., Bewernitz, M., & Shechtman, O.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida Health (US)
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Classen, Sherrilene
- Venue
- American Journal of Occupational Therapy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2011-03
- Volume
- 65
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 179-188
- ISSN
- 0272-9490 (ISSN-L)
- 1943-7676
- OpenAlex
- W2014317377
- Cited by
- 156
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 10.73
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- American Journal of Occupational Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Simulation and Modeling Applications
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Ergonomics and Musculoskeletal Disorders
- Keywords
- simulator sickness, driving simulator, virtual reality, motion sickness, client factors, vection, postural instability, simulator calibration, older adults, gender differences
- MeSH terms
- Automobile Driving, Computer Simulation, Occupational Therapy, Psychomotor Performance, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine
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