Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.

Our objective was to assess the influence of visual flow direction on physiological changes and symptoms elicited by cybersickness. Twelve healthy subjects (6 male and 6 female) were exposed to a 15-min virtual ride on a rollercoaster on two different days in a counterbalanced manner, such half of p...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Alireza Mazloumi Gavgani, Deborah M Hodgson, Eugene Nalivaiko
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2017-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5544223?pdf=render
id doaj-dbb033d207de4eb6a22af76adcd662bf
record_format Article
spelling doaj-dbb033d207de4eb6a22af76adcd662bf2020-11-25T00:24:09ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032017-01-01128e018279010.1371/journal.pone.0182790Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.Alireza Mazloumi GavganiDeborah M HodgsonEugene NalivaikoOur objective was to assess the influence of visual flow direction on physiological changes and symptoms elicited by cybersickness. Twelve healthy subjects (6 male and 6 female) were exposed to a 15-min virtual ride on a rollercoaster on two different days in a counterbalanced manner, such half of participants were facing forward during the first ride while another half was facing backward. Forehead skin conductance, heart rate and HRV parameters (SDRR, RMSSD) were collected as objective measures; subjective symptoms were assessed with the Motion Sickness Assessment Questioner immediately after exposure. We found that while nausea ratings at which participants terminated the experiment did not differ between forward/backward rides, the mean ride tolerance time was significantly longer during reverse ride compared to forward ride (6.1±0.4 vs 5.0±0.5 min, respectively, p = 0.01, η2 = 0.45). Analysis of HRV parameters revealed significant reduction in both RMSSD (p = 0.02, t = 2.62, η2 = 0.43) and SDRR (p = 0.01, t = 2.90, η2 = 0.45) in the forward ride; no such changes were found in the backward ride. We also found that amplitude of phasic changes in forehead skin conductance increased significantly in both ride directions. This increase however was significantly lower (p<0.05) in backward ride when compared to the forward ride. When assessed immediately post-ride, subjects reported significantly lower (p = 0.04) subjective symptom intensity after the reverse ride compared to the forward ride. We conclude that the direction of visual flow has a significant effect on the symptoms reported by the subjects and on the physiological changes during cybersickness.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5544223?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Alireza Mazloumi Gavgani
Deborah M Hodgson
Eugene Nalivaiko
spellingShingle Alireza Mazloumi Gavgani
Deborah M Hodgson
Eugene Nalivaiko
Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Alireza Mazloumi Gavgani
Deborah M Hodgson
Eugene Nalivaiko
author_sort Alireza Mazloumi Gavgani
title Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
title_short Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
title_full Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
title_fullStr Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
title_full_unstemmed Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
title_sort effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2017-01-01
description Our objective was to assess the influence of visual flow direction on physiological changes and symptoms elicited by cybersickness. Twelve healthy subjects (6 male and 6 female) were exposed to a 15-min virtual ride on a rollercoaster on two different days in a counterbalanced manner, such half of participants were facing forward during the first ride while another half was facing backward. Forehead skin conductance, heart rate and HRV parameters (SDRR, RMSSD) were collected as objective measures; subjective symptoms were assessed with the Motion Sickness Assessment Questioner immediately after exposure. We found that while nausea ratings at which participants terminated the experiment did not differ between forward/backward rides, the mean ride tolerance time was significantly longer during reverse ride compared to forward ride (6.1±0.4 vs 5.0±0.5 min, respectively, p = 0.01, η2 = 0.45). Analysis of HRV parameters revealed significant reduction in both RMSSD (p = 0.02, t = 2.62, η2 = 0.43) and SDRR (p = 0.01, t = 2.90, η2 = 0.45) in the forward ride; no such changes were found in the backward ride. We also found that amplitude of phasic changes in forehead skin conductance increased significantly in both ride directions. This increase however was significantly lower (p<0.05) in backward ride when compared to the forward ride. When assessed immediately post-ride, subjects reported significantly lower (p = 0.04) subjective symptom intensity after the reverse ride compared to the forward ride. We conclude that the direction of visual flow has a significant effect on the symptoms reported by the subjects and on the physiological changes during cybersickness.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5544223?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT alirezamazloumigavgani effectsofvisualflowdirectiononsignsandsymptomsofcybersickness
AT deborahmhodgson effectsofvisualflowdirectiononsignsandsymptomsofcybersickness
AT eugenenalivaiko effectsofvisualflowdirectiononsignsandsymptomsofcybersickness
_version_ 1725353683674202112