China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Simulation for Design
Published in Walter R. Boot, Neil Charness, Sara J. Czaja, Wendy A. Rogers, Designing for Older Adults, 2020
Walter R. Boot, Neil Charness, Sara J. Czaja, Wendy A. Rogers
One of the biggest challenges involving simulations can be simulator sickness (also sometimes called cyber sickness). Simulator sickness is a risk when study participants must interact with or navigate 3D virtual environments, especially for prolonged periods of time. Examples include the use of driving simulators, flight simulators, and head-mounted virtual reality (VR) systems (e.g., HTC Vive or Oculus Rift). This effect can be particularly true for fixed-based driving and flight simulators in which the simulator itself does not move, but the simulation depicts rapid motion. Symptoms of simulator sickness can include nausea, dizziness, headache, fatigue, and, in more severe cases, vomiting. Although there are a number of competing theories to explain the phenomenon, simulator sickness is most often triggered when there is a conflict between motion information received through vision and through the body (vestibular system). In many simulators, visual information will convey motion, while senses from the body provide information that the body is at rest. For reasons that are not entirely understood, older adults, and especially older women, are at higher risk for simulator sickness.
Coordination of Postural Control and Vehicular Control: Implications for Multimodal Perception and Simulation of Self-Motion
Published in Peter Hancock, John Flach, Jeff Caird, Kim Vicente, Local Applications of the Ecological Approach to Human-Machine Systems, 2018
The postural affordances of optical disturbances are different from those of mechanical disturbances (Riccio, 1993b). Optical disturbances should be most destabilizing and, thus, most nausogenic in roll axis. Data are not yet available, however, for the differential effect of axis of optical disturbance on visually induced motion sickness. Finally, it should be noted that simulator sickness includes symptoms such as eye strain, headache, blurred vision, and difficulty focusing that are not common in other forms of motion sickness (see Kennedy et al., 1990). Such symptoms may be due to disruptions in the eye-head system that are similar to the disruptions in postural control. Disruptions of the eye-head system may be due to the optical peculiarities of visual displays. Presumably, postural instability is responsible for the symptoms that are common to all forms of motion sickness (Riccio & Stoffregen, 1991).
Simulator Sickness Is Polygenic and Polysymptomatic: Implications for Research
Published in Florian Jentsch, Michael Curtis, Eduardo Salas, Simulation in Aviation Training, 2017
Robert S. Kennedy, Jennifer E. Fowlkes
Although the incidence of simulator sickness can be controlled to some extent by the manner of simulator usage (Kennedy, Berbaum, Lilienthal et al., 1987), a critical issue is how to design visual simulators that produce acceptably low levels of sickness under specified conditions. Even with a heavily sponsored research-and-development program, the key to understanding and ultimately solving the simulator sickness problem through simulator-display design lies in the experimental strategy adopted. Few laboratory studies have been conducted to investigate equipment effects, and most of these were not designed with sufficient statistical power to reveal existing effects. The purpose of this article is to discuss the problems that research in this area must address and to suggest effective research strategies. Our discussions arise from two analyses. The first is analysis of an extensive simulator sickness data base collected from more than 2,000 exposures from 10 Navy simulators (Kennedy et al., 1989). The composition of the data base appears in Table 1. For descriptive statistics (e.g., incidence of symptoms) and additional data about these simulator systems, the reader is encouraged to consult the original work. The second is a statistical power analysis that serves (a) to summarize and formalize the difficulty in quantifying design factors implicated in simulator sickness and (b) to provide estimates of the sensitivity of experiments investigating these effects.
A comparative assessment of subjective experience in simulator and on-road driving under normal and time pressure driving conditions
Published in International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, 2023
Nishant Mukund Pawar, Ankit Kumar Yadav, Nagendra R. Velaga
A driving simulator provides physical surrounding similar to an actual car with the help of control mechanisms and sound systems to stimulate the sense of driving experience. Nevertheless, the use of driving simulator is observed to be limited due to the adverse effect of simulator sickness. Simulator sickness is a condition analogous to motion sickness which is often experienced as a side effect during and after exposure to various virtual reality environments (Dużmańska et al., 2018; Lucas et al., 2020). Motion sickness is a sensation of wooziness often caused due to the perception of physical and visual motions (Heitz, 2018; Lucas et al., 2020). Drivers driving the simulator are in an illusion of self-motion where they experience movement due to simulation, but, in fact, are stationary. This effect is known as vection which produces an illusion of moving ahead (Almallah et al., 2021). The intensity of vection depends on the horizontal field of view. The horizontal field of view greater than 30 degrees results in a greater perception of self-motion (Stoner et al., 2011). However, a wide field of view is required in a driving simulator to display the right side and left side of the road for negotiating the driving scenario.
When virtuality becomes real: Relevance of mental abilities and age in simulator adaptation and dropouts
Published in Ergonomics, 2020
Magnus Liebherr, Stephan Schweig, Annika Brandtner, Heike Averbeck, Niko Maas, Dieter Schramm, Matthias Brand
Simulator sickness is a phenomenon that is occasionally reported in the context of simulated environments and comprises symptoms such as headache, (cold) sweating, dry mouth, dizziness, disorientation, drowsiness, nausea, vertigo, and vomiting (Balk, Bertola, and Inman 2013; Brooks et al. 2010). Simulator sickness therefore might cause drop-out rates between 5% and 30% (e.g. Cobb et al. 1999; Stanney, Kingdon, and Kennedy 2002; Stanney, Mourant, and Kennedy 1998). Some studies identified sex-related differences with a lower rate in males (Allen et al. 2003; Freund and Green 2006; Garcia, Baldwin, and Dworsky 2010; Jaeger and Mourant 2001), whereas others did not (Kolasinski and Gilson 1998; Mourant et al. 2007; Stanney, Kingdon, and Kennedy 2002). Furthermore, previous findings show increased simulator sickness symptoms in older adults compared to their younger counterparts (Bos et al. 2007; Brooks et al. 2010; Roenker et al. 2003), which is explained by a reduced experience with simulated environments (e.g. Domeyer, Cassavaugh, and Backs 2013). However, Mullen et al. (2010) report no effects of cognitive abilities. Neither attention nor visuomotor processing could be associated with the occurrence of simulator sickness symptoms. In contrast, Kawano et al. (2012) identified increased sickness in people with reduced visuospatial functions. Studies with cognitively impaired participants describe a relationship between cognitive functions and simulator sickness incidence rates (e.g. Freund and Green 2006; Rizzo et al. 2003).
The Perceptual Quality of the Oculus Rift for Immersive Virtual Reality
Published in Human–Computer Interaction, 2019
Manuela Chessa, Guido Maiello, Alessia Borsari, Peter J. Bex
Other potentially adverse symptoms may be even more severe than those induced by rendering distortions and the vergence–accommodation conflict. In the real world, when people move (e.g., they change the position of their eyes or head), the projections of the 3D real world immediately shift on the retinas while the vestibular system indicates movement of the head. Due to hardware and software limitations, in CAVE and HMD VR systems there is an unavoidable delay between a user’s movements and the updating of the virtual rendered scene. If this delay is excessive, the sensory information from the user’s visual and vestibular systems might be conflicting, and this can result in symptoms such as nausea, stomach awareness, dizziness, and headache. The sickness experienced in such cases may be referred to as “simulator sickness” or “cybersickness.” Simulator sickness and cybersickness are actually slightly different phenomena. The causes, methods of measurement, and nuanced differences between simulator sickness and cybersickness are addressed by a recent review (Davis, Nesbitt, & Nalivaiko, 2014). In Davis et al. (2014), the authors analyzed the use of questionnaires as a way of determining participants experience and susceptibility to VR and concluded that more cost-effective and objective physiological measures still need to be developed.