Virtual Reality Is Sexist: But It Does Not Have to Be.

Kay Stanney,Cali Fidopiastis,Linda Foster

doi:10.3389/frobt.2020.00004

Kay Stanney, Cali Fidopiastis + Show 1 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2020.00004

Copy DOI

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess what drives gender-based differences in the experience of cybersickness within virtual environments. In general, those who have studied cybersickness (i.e., motion sickness associated with virtual reality [VR] exposure), oftentimes report that females are more susceptible than males. As there are many individual factors that could contribute to gender differences, understanding the biggest drivers could help point to solutions. Two experiments were conducted in which males and females were exposed for 20 min to a virtual rollercoaster. In the first experiment, individual factors that may contribute to cybersickness were assessed via self-report, body measurements, and surveys. Cybersickness was measured via the simulator sickness questionnaire and physiological sensor data. Interpupillary distance (IPD) non-fit was found to be the primary driver of gender differences in cybersickness, with motion sickness susceptibility identified as a secondary driver. Females whose IPD could not be properly fit to the VR headset and had a high motion sickness history suffered the most cybersickness and did not fully recover within 1 h post exposure. A follow-on experiment demonstrated that when females could properly fit their IPD to the VR headset, they experienced cybersickness in a manner similar to males, with high cybersickness immediately upon cessation of VR exposure but recovery within 1 h post exposure. Taken together, the results suggest that gender differences in cybersickness may be largely contingent on whether or not the VR display can be fit to the IPD of the user; with a substantially greater proportion of females unable to achieve a good fit. VR displays may need to be redesigned to have a wider IPD adjustable range in order to reduce cybersickness rates, especially among females.

Highlights

IntroductionThose who have studied cybersickness (i.e., the motion sickness associated with VR exposure) and other forms of motion sickness oftentimes report that females are more susceptible than males
Those who have studied cybersickness and other forms of motion sickness oftentimes report that females are more susceptible than males
The results revealed that there were significant differences in the cybersickness experienced between the flatscreen TV and VR conditions

Summary

Introduction

Those who have studied cybersickness (i.e., the motion sickness associated with VR exposure) and other forms of motion sickness oftentimes report that females are more susceptible than males. When Lawson (2014) reviewed 46 studies examining gender differences in motion sickness, he reported that only 26/46 (56.5%) found higher levels of susceptibility in females as Virtual Reality Is Sexist compared to males. While females have been shown to have higher emetic response rates (Kennedy et al, 1995; Golding, 2006), as well as greater sensitivity in peripheral alpha- and beta- adrenergic receptors (Girdler et al, 1990; Kajantie and Phillips, 2006), which increases autonomic responses associated with motion sickness (Finley et al, 2004), Jokerst et al (1999) found no significant differences between the genders in gastric tachyarrhythmia during exposure to an optokinetic drum, and Cheung and Hofer (2002) found no significant gender-based physiological differences during coriolis cross-coupling stimulation. While females are generally thought to have higher susceptibility to cybersickness than males, this relationship has not been well-characterized, especially for the latest generation of VR headsets

Objectives

Results

Discussion

Conclusion