skip to main content
research-article

Virtual Reality Sickness Mitigation Methods: A Comparative Study in a Racing Game

Authors Info & Claims
Published:28 April 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Using virtual reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMDs) can induce VR sickness. VR sickness can cause strong discomfort, decrease users' presence and enjoyment, especially in games, shorten the duration of the VR experience, and can even pose health risks. Previous research has explored different VR sickness mitigation methods by adding visual effects or elements. Field of View (FOV) reduction, Depth of Field (DOF) blurring, and adding a rest frame into the virtual environment are examples of such methods. Although useful in some cases, they might result in information loss. This research is the first to compare VR sickness, presence, workload to complete a search task, and information loss of these three VR sickness mitigation methods in a racing game with two levels of control. To do this, we conducted a mixed factorial user study (N = 32) with degree of control as the between-subjects factor and the VR sickness mitigation techniques as the within-subjects factor. Participants were required to find targets with three difficulty levels while steering or not steering a car in a virtual environment. Our results show that there are no significant differences in VR sickness, presence and workload among these techniques under two levels of control in our VR racing game. We also found that changing FOV dynamically or using DOF blur effects would result in information loss while adding a target reticule as a rest frame would not.

References

  1. Isayas Berhe Adhanom, Nathan Navarro Griffin, Paul MacNeilage, and Eelke Folmer. 2020. The Effect of a Foveated Field-of-view Restrictor on VR Sickness. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 645--652. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR46266.2020.00087Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Majed Al Zayer, Isayas B. Adhanom, Paul MacNeilage, and Eelke Folmer. 2019. The Effect of Field-of-View Restriction on Sex Bias in VR Sickness and Spatial Navigation Performance. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300584Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Kevin Wayne Arthur. 2000. Effects of field of view on performance with head-mounted displays. Thesis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Helmut Buhler, Sebastian Misztal, and Jonas Schild. 2018. Reducing VR Sickness Through Peripheral Visual Effects. In 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 517--9. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2018.8446346Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Zekun Cao, Jason Jerald, and Regis Kopper. 2018. Visually-Induced Motion Sickness Reduction via Static and Dynamic Rest Frames. In 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 105--112. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2018.8446210Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Kieran Carnegie and Taehyun Rhee. 2015. Reducing Visual Discomfort with HMDs Using Dynamic Depth of Field. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 35, 5 (2015), 34--41. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2015.98Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Kazimierz Choroš and Piotr Nippe. 2019. Software Techniques to Reduce Cybersickness Among Users of Immersive Virtual Reality Environments (Intelligent Information and Database Systems). Springer International Publishing, 638--648.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Daniel Clarke, Graham McGregor, Brianna Rubin, Jonathan Stanford, and T. C. Nicholas Graham. 2016. Arcaid: Addressing Situation Awareness and Simulator Sickness in a Virtual Reality Pac-Man Game. In Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play Companion Extended Abstracts (Austin, Texas, USA) (CHI PLAY Companion '16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 39--45. https://doi.org/10.1145/2968120.2968124Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Simon Davis, Keith Nesbitt, and Eugene Nalivaiko. 2014. A Systematic Review of Cybersickness. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment (Newcastle, NSW, Australia) (IE2014). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1--9. https://doi.org/10.1145/2677758.2677780Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Xiao Dong, Ken Yoshida, and Thomas A. Stoffregen. 2011. Control of a virtual vehicle influences postural activity and motion sickness. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 17, 2 (2011), 128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Ajoy S. Fernandes and Steven K. Feiner. 2016. Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification. In 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). 201--210. https://doi.org/10.1109/3DUI.2016.7460053Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Sandra G. Hart. 2006. Nasa-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 Years Later. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 50, 9 (2006), 904--908. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605000909Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Sébastien Hillaire, Anatole Lecuyer, Rémi Cozot, and Géry Casiez. 2008a. Using an Eye-Tracking System to Improve Camera Motions and Depth-of-Field Blur Effects in Virtual Environments. In 2008 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference. 47--50. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2008.4480749Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Sébastien Hillaire, Anatole Lécuyer, Rémi Cozot, and Géry Casiez. 2008b. Depth-of-Field Blur Effects for First-Person Navigation in Virtual Environments. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications 28, 6 (2008), 47--55. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2008.113Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Robert S. Kennedy, Norman E. Lane, Kevin S. Berbaum, and Michael G. Lilienthal. 1993. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (1993), 203--220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Eugenia M Kolasinski. 1995. Simulator sickness in virtual environments. Vol. 1027. US Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Joseph J. LaViola. 2000. A discussion of cybersickness in virtual environments. SIGCHI Bull. 32, 1 (2000), 47--56. https://doi.org/10.1145/333329.333344Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. JJ-W. Lin, Henry B. L. Duh, Donald E. Parker, Habib Abi-Rached, and Thomas A. Furness. 2002. Effects of field of view on presence, enjoyment, memory, and simulator sickness in a virtual environment. In Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality 2002. 164--171. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2002.996519Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Steven Lincoln. 2015. 'Virtual nose' may reduce simulator sickness in video games. Retrieved March 6, 2021 from https://polytechnic.purdue.edu/newsroom/virtual-nose-may-reduce-simulator-sickness-video-gamesGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Roman Luks and Fotis Liarokapis. 2019. Investigating Motion Sickness Techniques for Immersive Virtual Environments. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM International Conference on PErvasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments (Rhodes, Greece) (PETRA '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 280--288. https://doi.org/10.1145/3316782.3321535Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Takurou Magaki and Michael Vallance. 2017. Measuring Reduction Methods for VR Sickness in Virtual Environments. Int. J. Virtual Pers. Learn. Environ. 7, 2 (2017), 27--43. https://doi.org/10.4018/ijvple.2017070103Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Julien Marengo, Phil Lopes, and Ronan Boulic. 2019. On the Influence of the Supine Posture on Simulation Sickness in Virtual Reality. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Games (CoG). 1--8. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIG.2019.8848098Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Michael E. McCauley and Thomas J. Sharkey. 1992. Cybersickness: Perception of Self-Motion in Virtual Environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 1, 3 (1992), 311--318. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1992.L3.311Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Diego Monteiro, Hai-Ning Liang, Jialin Wang, Hao Chen, and Nilufar Baghaei. 2020. An In-Depth Exploration of the Effect of 2D/3D Views and Controller Types on First Person Shooter Games in Virtual Reality. In 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). 713--724. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR50242.2020.00102Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. Diego Monteiro, Hai-Ning Liang, Wenge Xu, Marvin Brucker, Vijayakumar Nanjappan, and Yong Yue. 2018. Evaluating enjoyment, presence, and emulator sickness in VR games based on first- and third- person viewing perspectives. Computer Animation and Virtual Worlds 29, 3--4 (2018), e1830. https://doi.org/10.1002/cav.1830Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. Guang-Yu Nie, Henry B. L. Duh, Yue Liu, and Yongtian Wang. 2020. Analysis on Mitigation of Visually Induced Motion Sickness by Applying Dynamical Blurring on a User's Retina. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 26, 8 (2020), 2535--2545. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2019.2893668Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Nahal Norouzi, Gerd Bruder, and Greg Welch. 2018. Assessing Vignetting as a Means to Reduce VR Sickness during Amplified Head Rotations. In Proceedings of the 15th ACM Symposium on Applied Perception (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) (SAP '18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 19, 8 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3225153.3225162Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Louise O'Hare, Tingting Zhang, Harold T. Nefs, and Paul B. Hibbard. 2013. Visual Discomfort and Depth-of-Field. i-Perception 4, 3 (2013), 156--169. https://doi.org/10.1068/i0566Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Randy Pausch, Thomas Crea, and Matthew Conway. 1992. A Literature Survey for Virtual Environments: Military Flight Simulator Visual Systems and Simulator Sickness. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 1, 3 (1992), 344--363. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1992.1.3.344Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Thiago M. Porcino, Esteban Clua, Daniela Trevisan, Cristina N. Vasconcelos, and Cristina Valente. 2017. Minimizing cyber sickness in head mounted display systems: Design guidelines and applications. In 2017 IEEE 5th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH). 1--6. https://doi.org/10.1109/SeGAH.2017.7939283Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Jerrold D. Prothero. 1998. The role of rest frames in vection, presence and motion sickness. Thesis.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Jerrold D. Prothero and Donald E. Parker. 2003. A Unified Approach to Presence and Motion Sickness. Virtual and adaptive environments: Applications, implications, and human performance issues (2003), 47.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. James T. Reason and Joseph John Brand. 1975. Motion sickness. Academic Press, Oxford, England. vii, 310-vii, 310 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Dimitrios Saredakis, Ancret Szpak, Brandon Birckhead, Hannah A. D. Keage, Albert Rizzo, and Tobias Loetscher. 2020. Factors Associated With Virtual Reality Sickness in Head-Mounted Displays: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in human neuroscience 14 (2020), 96--96. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00096Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. A. Fleming Seay, David M. Krum, Larry Hodges, and William Ribarsky. 2001. Simulator sickness and presence in a high FOV virtual environment. In Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality 2001. 299--300. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2001.913806Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Sarah Sharples, Sue Cobb, Amanda Moody, and John R. Wilson. 2008. Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): Comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. Displays 29, 2 (2008), 58--69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.005Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Andrej Somrak, Iztok Humar, M. Shamim Hossain, Mohammed F. Alhamid, M. Anwar Hossain, and Jože Guna. 2019. Estimating VR Sickness and user experience using different HMD technologies: An evaluation study. Future Generation Computer Systems 94 (2019), 302--316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2018.11.041Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Kay M. Stanney, Robert S. Kennedy, and Julie M. Drexler. 1997. Cybersickness is Not Simulator Sickness. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 41, 2 (1997), 1138--1142. https://doi.org/10.1177/107118139704100292Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Martin Usoh, Ernest Catena, Sima Arman, and Mel Slater. 2000. Using Presence Questionnaires in Reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 9, 5 (2000), 497--503. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474600566989Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Roshan Venkatakrishnan, Rohith Venkatakrishnan, Ayush Bhargava, Kathryn Lucaites, Hannah Solini, Matias Volonte, Andrew Robb, Sabarish V. Babu, Wen-Chieh Lin, and Yun-Xuan Lin. 2020. Comparative Evaluation of the Effects of Motion Control on Cybersickness in Immersive Virtual Environments. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 672--681. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR46266.2020.00090Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Jialin Wang, Hai-Ning Liang, Diego Vilela Monteiro, Wenge Xu, Hao Chen, and Qiwen Chen. 2020. Real-Time Detection of Simulator Sickness in Virtual Reality Games Based on Players' Psychophysiological Data during Gameplay. In 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct). 247--248. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR-Adjunct51615.2020.00071.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Carolin Wienrich, Christine Katharina Weidner, Celina Schatto, David Obremski, and Johann Habakuk Israel. 2018. A Virtual Nose as a Rest-Frame - The Impact on Simulator Sickness and Game Experience. In 2018 10th International Conference on Virtual Worlds and Games for Serious Applications (VS-Games). 1--8. https://doi.org/10.1109/VS-Games.2018.8493408Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Daniel Zielasko, Benjamin Weyers, and Torsten W. Kuhlen. 2019. A Non-Stationary Office Desk Substitution for Desk-Based and HMD-Projected Virtual Reality. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 1884--1889. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2019.8797837Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Virtual Reality Sickness Mitigation Methods: A Comparative Study in a Racing Game

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader
      About Cookies On This Site

      We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website.

      Learn more

      Got it!