Some Effects of Using Virtual Reality Technology

Data and Suggestions
  • Clare Regan
Part of the Defense Research Series book series (DRSS, volume 6)


This paper discusses some of the effects on the user of immersive virtual reality technology. Effects in this context refers to negative or unwanted side-effects of the technology, such as nausea.

In a study that set out to document the frequency of occurrence and severity of side-effects of immersion in VR, 150 subjects were immersed in the VR system for 20 minutes. Subjects were required to provide ratings on a 1–6 malaise scale immediately prior to the immersion, at 5 minute intervals during the 20 minute immersion period, and at 5 and 10 minutes post-immersion. Subjects also completed a standard simulator sickness questionnaire both immediately before and immediately after the immersion. Sixty-one percent of the subjects reported some symptoms of malaise at some point during the 20 minute immersion period and 10 minute post immersion period. These ranged from symptoms such as headaches and eyestrain to severe nausea. Five percent of the subjects had to withdraw from the study due to the severity of their symptoms.

Two possible causes of the side-effects documented are discussed. The first of these possible causes is that immersion in VR causes a conflict of the senses which results in the malaise. The second is that technological factors, such as the resolution of the displays, are responsible for some of the symptoms. Clear experimental data is lacking on these issues, and hence a program of investigation is underway.


Virtual Reality Motion Sickness Virtual Reality System Severe Nausea Virtual Reality Technology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Biocca, F (1992). Will simulation sickness slow down the diffusion of virtual environment technology? Presence 1 (3): 334–343.Google Scholar
  2. Chappelow, J F (1988). Simulation sickness in the Royal Air Force: A survey. In AGARD Conference Proceedings 433. Motion Cues in Flight Simulation and Simulator Induced Sickness.Google Scholar
  3. Gower, D W, Lilienthal, M G, Kennedy, R S. & Fowlkes, J E (1988). Simulator sickness in US Army and Navy fixed-and rotary-wing flight simulators. In AGARD Conference Proceedings 433. Motion Cues in Flight Simulation and Simulator Induced Sickness.Google Scholar
  4. Havron, M D & Butler, L F (1957). Evaluation of training effectiveness of the 2FH2 helicopter flight trainer research tool. Naval Training Device Center, Port Washington, New York NAVTRADEVCEN 1915–00–1.Google Scholar
  5. Kennedy, R S, Lilienthal, M G, Berbaum, K S, Baltzley, D R & McCauley, M E (1989). Simulator sickness in U.S. Navy flight simulators. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 60: 10–6.Google Scholar
  6. Pausch, R, Crea, T & Conway, M (1992). A literature survey for virtual environments: Military flight simulator visual systems and simulator sickness. Presence 1 (3): 344–363.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Clare Regan
    • 1
  1. 1.Ministry of DefenceDRAFarnborough, HantsEngland

Personalised recommendations