China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Visual Perception and Human–Computer Interaction in Surgical Augmented and Virtual Reality Environments
Published in Terry M. Peters, Cristian A. Linte, Ziv Yaniv, Jacqueline Williams, Mixed and Augmented Reality in Medicine, 2018
Roy Eagleson, Sandrine de Ribaupierre
Interactive, 3D, immersive AR/VR environments, by their nature, invite the user’s motor system response within the environment. Sensory-motor control, for the most part, involves feedback-based dynamics. Human control does not seem to require “absolute” coordinates for control but instead can guide interactions based on the relative spatial, relational information provided by the sensory system. However, by the nature of the production of the final motor system output, all relative inputs must be resolved into a single controlled output. Consequently, any inconsistent or incomplete sensory estimates must somehow be reconciled. In some cases, inconsistent input channels can be ignored but in most cases will lead to errors in the output, or worse, to a breakdown of the entire task, or in many cases, headaches or serious “simulator sickness.”
BCI and Games: Playful, Experience-Oriented Learning by Vivid Feedback?
Published in Chang S. Nam, Anton Nijholt, Fabien Lotte, Brain–Computer Interfaces Handbook, 2018
Silvia E. Kober, Manuel Ninaus, Elisabeth V.C. Friedrich, Reinhold Scherer
Besides psychological and cognitive strain, using an advanced technology such as VR to present the game-like feedback can cause physical side effects including ocular problems, disorientation, and nausea, which is called simulator sickness or cybersickness. Approximately 25% of participants interacting in VR report such cybersickness symptoms, which can potentially confound data and undo the potential value of game-like feedback using VR technology in BCI/NF applications (Brooks et al. 2010).
Motion-Induced Nausea and Vomiting
Published in John Kucharczyk, David J. Stewart, Alan D. Miller, Nausea and Vomiting: Recent Research and Clinical Advances, 2017
Visual input by itself can produce symptoms of motion sickness when the visual information is of the type that would normally indicate whole body motion and the expected corroborative vestibular input is missing.6 Examples include watching motion pictures shot from a moving vehicle,61,74 sitting in a stationary chair inside a rotating room or optokinetic drum,75–79 and operating a vehicle training device equipped with a moving visual display (simulator sickness).6,80 Inconsistent or conflicting combinations of vestibular and optokinetic stimulation can be more effective in eliciting motion sickness than either stimulus alone;22,76,81,82 however, visual input can also suppress motion sickness if the visual and vestibular signals are in accord.5,6,81,83,84 A common example is that reading a book in a moving vehicle can be provocative, while looking out the front window can aid in reducing or preventing motion sickness.61,85
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.
User experiences and perspectives of a driving simulator intervention for individuals with acquired brain injury: A qualitative study
Published in Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 2021
Bleydy Dimech-Betancourt, Jennie L. Ponsford, Judith L. Charlton, Pamela E. Ross, Renerus J. Stolwyk
Despite efforts to minimize simulator sickness, findings suggest that it represented a significant side effect of interacting with the simulator technology for more than half of the users. Although the current sample were not extremely deterred by simulator sickness, its management is imperative as it can negatively impact psychological presence and pose a barrier to engagement in training. Schultheis and colleagues (2007) have previously found that usability of a driving simulator for ABI survivors was negatively associated with the onset of simulator sickness. In the current study, symptoms of simulator sickness included headaches, heaviness in the head, eyestrain, and dizziness/vertigo. Onset of symptoms was predicted by sharp movements of the screen, increases in environmental stimuli, increases in cognitive load, and negotiating turns. Furthermore, video playback of scenarios induced sickness in some participants, which could detract from its purpose of enhancing self-awareness. Our results were consistent with an evidence-based review, which found that screen refresh rates, visually complex scenes and backgrounds, curves and turns, and city driving elicit simulator sickness (Classen, Bewernitz, & Shechtman, 2011).
Driving Simulator, Virtual Reality, and On-Road Interventions for Driving-Related Anxiety: A Systematic Review
Published in Occupational Therapy in Mental Health, 2021
Melissa Knott, Sang Ho Kim, April Vander Veen, Erik Angeli, Eric Evans, William Knight, April Ripley, Tuan Tran, Liliana Alvarez
Driving simulators provide a virtual, safe, and interactive representation of driving environments where driving errors cannot lead to real world crashes (Classen & Evans, 2017). Driving simulators present the visual road environment through monitor or screen displays, feature realistic driver controls for the user, and may include motion platforms that simulate the sensory feedback of the moving vehicle. Driving simulators may also be used as an intermediary step to screen for readiness and to improve driver self-efficacy before engaging in on-road sessions, such as graduated exposure to anxiety-provoking traffic environments or conditions (Fischer et al., 2020). Driving simulators have several advantages for clinical populations. Such advantages include (1) safety of the participant, (2) scenario versatility and accuracy, (3) standardization and repeatability, (4) objective performance measures, (5) cost and space effectiveness, and (6) the ability to include high risk groups (Evans & Akinwuntan, 2017). Limitations of driving simulators include the initial cost of purchasing the equipment, and the potential for Simulator Adaptation Syndrome or simulator sickness (SS) (Fischer et al., 2020; Stern et al., 2017). However, simulator sickness mitigation protocols can reduce the risk for, and onset of, SS (Stern et al., 2017). In recent years, technological advancements in simulation have increased accessibility to driving simulators for healthcare professionals by lowering the cost and improving the fidelity of the simulated environments (Classen & Evans, 2017).