Effects of steering locomotion and teleporting on cybersickness and presence in HMD-based virtual reality

  • Jeremy Clifton
  • Stephen PalmisanoEmail author
Original Article


While head-mounted display-based virtual reality (VR) can produce compelling feelings of presence (or “being there”) in its users, it also often induces motion sickness. This study compared the presence, cybersickness and perceptions of self-motion (or “vection”) induced when using two common methods of virtual locomotion: steering locomotion and teleporting. In four trials, conducted over two separate days, 25 participants repeatedly explored the “Red Fall” virtual environment in the game Nature Treks VR for 16 min at a time. Although steering locomotion was found to be more sickening on average than teleporting, 9 participants reported more severe sickness while teleporting. On checking their spontaneous postural activity before entering VR, these “TELEsick” participants were found to differ from “STEERsick” participants in terms of their positional variability when attempting to stand still. While cybersickness was not altered by having the user stand or sit during gameplay, presence was enhanced by standing during virtual locomotion. Cybersickness was found to increase with time in trial for both methods of virtual locomotion. By contrast, presence only increased with time in trial during steering locomotion (it did not vary over time when teleporting). Steering locomotion was also found to generate greater presence for female, but not male, participants. While there was not a clear advantage for teleporting over steering locomotion in terms of reducing cybersickness, we did find some evidence of the benefits of steering locomotion for presence.


Motion sickness Cybersickness Virtual reality Head-mounted display Presence 



  1. Al Zayer M, Adhanom IB, MacNeilage P, Folmer E (2019) The effect of field-of-view restriction on sex bias in VR sickness and spatial navigation performance. CHI Conf Hum Factors Comput Syst Proc. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen B, Hanley T, Rokers B, Green CS (2016) Visual 3D motion acuity predicts discomfort in 3D stereoscopic environments. Entertain Comput 13:1–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arcioni B, Palmisano S, Apthorp D, Kim J (2018) Postural stability predicts the likelihood of cybersickness in active HMD-based virtual reality. Displays 58:3–11. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bangay S, Preston L (1998) An investigation into factors influencing immersion in interactive virtual reality environments. Stud Health Technol Inf. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bhagat K, Wei-Kai L, Chun-Yen C (2016) A cost-effective interactive 3D virtual reality system applied to military live firing training. Virtual Real 20:127–140. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bles W, Bos JE, De Graaf B, Groen E, Wertheim AH (1998) Motion sickness: only one provocative conflict? Brain Res Bull 47:481–487. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boletsis C (2017) The new era of virtual reality locomotion: a systematic literature review of techniques and a proposed typology. Multimodal Technol Interact 1:24. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bonato F, Bubka A, Alfieri L (2004) Display color affects motion sickness symptoms in an optokinetic drum. Aviat Space Environ Med 75:306–311Google Scholar
  9. Bonato F, Bubka A, Story M (2005) Rotation direction change hastens motion sickness onset in an optokinetic drum. Aviat Space Environ Med 76:823–827Google Scholar
  10. Bonato F, Bubka A, Palmisano S, Phillip D, Moreno G (2008) Vection change exacerbates simulator sickness in virtual environments. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ 17:283–292. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bonnet CT, Faugloire E, Riley MA, Bardy BG, Stoffregen TA (2006) Motion sickness preceded by unstable displacements of the center of pressure. Hum Mov Sci 25:800–820. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bouchard S, Robillard G, S-Jacques J, Dumoulin S, Patry MJ, Renaud P (2004) Reliability and validity of a single-item measure of presence in VR. In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on creating, connecting and collaborating through computing:56–61.
  13. Bowman DA, Koller D, Hodges LF (1997) Travel in immersive virtual environments: an evaluation of viewpoint motion control techniques. Proc IEEE Ann Int Symp Virtual Real 1997:45–52. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Bozgeyikli E, Raij A, Katkoori S, Dubey R (2016) Point & teleport locomotion technique for virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 2016 annual symposium on computer–human interaction in play 205–216.
  15. Busscher B, de Vliegher D, Ling Y, Brinkman WP (2011) Physiological measures and self-report to evaluate neutral virtual reality worlds. J Cybertherapy Rehabilit 4:15–25Google Scholar
  16. Cao Z, Jerald J, Kopper R (2018). Visually-induced motion sickness reduction via static and dynamic rest frames. Proc IEEE Virtual Real 3D User Interfaces 2018:105–112
  17. Chang CH, Pan WW, Tseng LY, Stoffregen TA (2012) Postural activity and motion sickness during video game play in children and adults. Exp Brain Res 217:299–309. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Chang CH, PanWW Chen FC, Stoffregen TA (2013) Console video games, postural activity, and motion sickness during passive restraint. Exp Brain Res 229:235–242. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Christou CG, Aristidou P (2017) Steering versus teleport locomotion for head mounted displays. Proc Int Conf Augment Real Virtual Real Comput Gr 2017:431–446. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cook HE, Hassebrock JA, Smart LJ (2018) Other People’s Posture: visually induced motion sickness from naturally generated optic flow. Front Psychol 9:1901. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cooper N, Milella F, Cant I, Pinto C, White MD, Meyer GF (2016) The effects of multisensory cues on the sense of presence and task performance in a virtual reality environment. Perception 45:332–333Google Scholar
  22. Cummings JJ, Bailenson JN (2016) How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychol 19:272–309. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. De Leo G, Diggs LA, Radici E, Mastaglio TW (2014) Measuring sense of presence and user characteristics to predict effective training in an online simulated virtual environment. Simul Healthc 9:1–6. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Diels C, Ukai K, Howarth PA (2007) Visually induced motion sickness with radial displays: effects of gaze angle and fixation. Aviat Space Environ Med 78:659–665Google Scholar
  25. Felnhofer A, Kothgassner OD, Beutl L, Hlavacs H, Kryspin-Exner I (2012) Is virtual reality made for men only? Exploring gender differences in the sense of presence. In: Proceedings of the international society on presence research:103–12Google Scholar
  26. Felnhofer A, Kothgassner OD, Hauk N, Beutl L, Hlavacs H, Kryspin-Exner I (2014) Physical and social presence in collaborative virtual environments: exploring age and gender differences with respect to empathy. Comput Hum Behav 31:272–279. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Flanagan MB, May JG, Dobie TG (2002) Optokinetic nystagmus, vection, and motion sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 73:1067–1073Google Scholar
  28. Freitag S, Rausch D, Kuhlen T (2014) Reorientation in virtual environments using interactive portals. In: 2014 IEEE symposium on 3D user interfaces (3DUI):119–122.
  29. Frommel J, Sonntag S, Weber M (2017) Effects of controller-based locomotion on player experience in a virtual reality exploration game. In: Proceedings of the 12th international conference on the foundations of digital games, pp 30–36.
  30. Gamito P, Oliveira J, Santos P, Morais D, Saraiva T, Pombal M, Mota B (2008) Presence, immersion and cybersickness assessment through a test anxiety virtual environment. Ann Rev CyberTherapy Telemed 6:83–90Google Scholar
  31. Garcia A, Baldwin C, Dworsky M (2010) Gender differences in simulator sickness in fixed-versus rotating-base driving simulator. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Ann Meet 54:1551–1555. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gavgani AM, Hodgson DM, Nalivaiko E (2017) Effects of visual flow direction on signs and symptoms of cybersickness. PLoS ONE. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Golding JF, Doolan K, Acharya A, Tribak M, Gresty MA (2012) Cognitive cues and visually induced motion sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 83:477–482. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Habgood J, Moore D, Wilson D, Alapont S (2018) Rapid, continuous movement between nodes as an accessible virtual reality locomotion technique. Proc IEEE Virtual Real. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Hill K, Howarth P (2000) Habituation to the side effects of immersion in a virtual environment. Displays 21:25–30. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Huurnink A, Fransz DP, Kingma I, van Dieën JH (2013) Comparison of a laboratory grade force platform with a Nintendo Wii Balance Board on measurement of postural control in single-leg stance balance tasks. J Biomech 46:1392–1395. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Ji JT, So RH, Cheung RT (2009) Isolating the effects of vection and optokinetic nystagmus on optokinetic rotation-induced motion sickness. Hum Factors 51:739–751. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Kennedy RS, Lane NE, Berbaum KS, Lilienthal MG (1993) Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int J Aviat Psychol 3:203–220. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Keshavarz B, Hecht H (2011) Validating an efficient method to quantify motion sickness. Hum Factors 53:415–426. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Keshavarz B, Hettinger LJ, Vena D, Campos JL (2014) Combined effects of auditory and visual cues on the perception of vection. Exp Brain Res 232:827–836. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Keshavarz B, Hecht H, Lawson BD (2015) Visually induced motion sickness: causes, characteristics, and countermeasures. In: Hale KS, Stanney KM (eds) Handbook of virtual environments: design, implementation, and applications. CRC Press, Florida, Boca Raton, pp 647–689Google Scholar
  42. Keshavarz B, Novak AC, Hettinger LJ, Stoffregen TA, Campos JL (2017) Passive restraint reduces visually induced motion sickness in older adults. J Exp Psychol Appl 23:85–99. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Keshavarz B, Phillip-Muller AE, Hemmerich W, Riecke BE, Campos JL (2018) The effect of visual motion stimulus characteristics on vection and visually induced motion sickness. Displays 58:71–81. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Kim J, Palmisano S (2010) Eccentric gaze dynamics enhance vection in depth. Journal of Vision 10(12):7. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Kim YY, Kim HJ, Kim EN, Ko HD, Kim HT (2005) Characteristic changes in the physiological components of cybersickness. Psychophysiology 42:616–625. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Knight MM, Arns LL (2006) The relationship among age and other factors on incidence of cybersickness in immersive environment users. In: Proceedings of the 3Rd symposium: applied perception in graphics & visualization 162.
  47. Koslucher F, Haaland E, Malsch A, Webeler J, Stoffregen TA (2015) Sex difference in the incidence of motion sickness induced by linear visual oscillation. Aerosp Med Hum Perform 86:787–793. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Koslucher F, Haaland E, Stoffregen TA (2016) Sex differences in visual performance and postural sway precede sex differences in visually induced motion sickness. Exp Brain Res 234:313–322. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lachlan K, Kremar M (2011) Experiencing presence in video games: the role of presence tendencies, game experience, gender, and time spent in play. Commun Res Rep 28:27–31. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lackner JR (2014) Motion sickness: more than nausea and vomiting. Exp Brain Res 232:2493–2510. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Langbehn E, Lubos P, Steinicke F (2018) evaluation of locomotion techniques for room-scale VR. Joystick, teleportation, and redirected walking. In: Proceedings of the virtual reality international conference (VRIC).
  52. Lawson BD (2005) Exploiting the illusion of self-motion (vection) to achieve a feeling of ‘virtual acceleration’ in an immersive display. In: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on human–computer interaction 2005, Las Vegas, NV, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  53. Lawson BD (2015) Motion sickness symptomatology and origins. In: Hale KS, Stanney KM (eds) Handbook of virtual environments: design, implementation, and applications. CRC Press, Florida, Boca Raton, pp 532–587Google Scholar
  54. Lawther A, Griffin MJ (1988) A survey of the occurrence of motion sickness amongst passengers at sea. Aviat Space Environ Med 59:399–406. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lin JW, Duh HBL, Parker DE, Abi-Rached H, Furness TA (2002) Effects of field of view on presence, enjoyment, memory, and simulator sickness in a virtual environment. Proc IEEE Virtual Real 2002:164–171. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Ling Y, Nefs HT, Brinkman WP, Qu C, Heynderickx I (2013) The relationship between individual characteristics and experienced presence. Comput Hum Behav 29:1519–1530. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Ling Y, Nefs HT, Morina N, Heynderickx I, Brinkman WP (2014) A meta-analysis on the relationship between self-reported presence and anxiety in virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety disorders. PLoS ONE 9:1–12. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Liu CL, Uang ST (2011) Effects of presence on causing cybersickness in the elderly within a 3D virtual store. In: International conference on human-computer interaction, pp 490–499. Google Scholar
  59. Liu X, Liu Y, Zhu X, An M, Hu F (2016) Virtual reality based navigation training for astronaut moving in a simulated space station. In: International conference on virtual, augmented and mixed reality, pp 416–423. Google Scholar
  60. Llorach G, Evans A, Blat J (2014) Simulator sickness and presence using HMDs: comparing use of a game controller and a position estimate system. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM symposium on virtual reality software and technology, pp 137–140.
  61. Lorch RF, Myers JL (1990) Regression analyses of repeated measures data in cognitive research. J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 16:149–157. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mania K, Chalmers A (2001) The effects of levels of immersion on memory and presence in virtual environments: a reality centered approach. CyberPsychol Behav 4:247–264. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Merhi O, Faugloire E, Flanagan MB, Stoffregen TA (2007) Motion sickness, console video games, and head-mounted displays. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 49:920–934. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Milleville-Pennel I, Charron C (2015) Do mental workload and presence experienced when driving a real car predispose drivers to simulator sickness? An exploratory study. Accid Anal Prev 74:192–202. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Moghadam KR, Banigan C, Ragan ED (2018) Scene transitions and teleportation in virtual reality and the implications for spatial awareness and sickness. Proc IEEE Trans Vis Comput Gr. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Mondellini M, Arlati S, Greci L, Ferrigno G, Sacco M (2018) Sense of presence and cybersickness while cycling in virtual environments: their contribution to subjective experience. In: De Paolis L, Bourdot P (eds) Augmented reality, virtual reality, and computer graphics. Springer, Cham, pp 3–20. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Munafo J, Diedrick M, Stoffregen TA (2017) The virtual reality head-mounted display Oculus Rift induces motion sickness and is sexist in its effects. Exp Brain Res 235:889–901. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Nguyen-Vo T, Riecke BE, Stuerzlinger W (2018) Simulated reference frame: A cost-effective solution to improve spatial orientation in VR. Proc IEEE Virtual Real 3D User Interfaces 2018:415–422.
  69. Nichols S, Haldane C, Wilson JR (2000) Measurement of presence and its consequences in virtual environments. Int J Hum Comput Stud 52:471–491. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Nooij SA, Pretto P, Oberfeld D, Hecht H, Bülthoff HH (2017) Vection is the main contributor to motion sickness induced by visual yaw rotation: implications for conflict and eye movement theories. PLoS One. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Oman CM (1982) A heuristic mathematical model for the dynamics of sensory conflict and motion sickness. Acta Oto-Laryngol 392:1–44Google Scholar
  72. Palmisano S, Riecke BE (2018) The search for instantaneous vection: an oscillating visual prime reduces vection onset latency. PLoS ONE. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Palmisano SA, Bonato F, Bubka A, Folder J (2007) Vertical display oscillation effects on forward vection and simulator sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med 78:951–956. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Palmisano S, Kim J, Allison R, Bonato F (2011) Simulated viewpoint jitter shakes sensory conflict accounts of vection. See Perceiving 24:173–200. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Palmisano S, Kim J, Freeman TCA (2012) Horizontal fixation point oscillation and simulated viewpoint oscillation both increase vection in depth. J Vis 12(12):15. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Palmisano S, Allison RS, Schira MM, Barry RJ (2015) Future challenges for vection research: definitions, functional significance, measures, and neural bases. Front Psychol 6:1–15. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Palmisano S, Barry RJ, De Blasio FM, Fogarty JS (2016) Identifying objective EEG based markers of linear vection in depth. Front Psychol 7:1205. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Palmisano S, Arcioni B, Stapley PJ (2017a) Predicting vection and visually induced motion sickness based on spontaneous postural activity. Exp Brain Res 236:315–329. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Palmisano S, Mursic R, Kim J (2017b) Vection and cybersickness generated by head-and-display motion in the Oculus Rift. Displays 46:1–8. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Pedram S, Perez P, Palmisano S, Farrelly M (2018) The factors affecting the quality of learning process and outcome in virtual reality environment for safety training in the context of mining industry. Int Conf Appl Hum Factors Ergon 2018:404–411. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Ragan ED, Wood A, McMahan RP, Bowman DA (2012) Trade-offs related to travel techniques and level of display fidelity in virtual data-analysis environments. Proc Joint Virtual Real Conf ICAT/EGVE/EuroVR 2012:81–84Google Scholar
  82. Read JA, Bohr I (2014) User experience while viewing stereoscopic 3D television. Ergonomics 57:1140–1153. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Reason JT, Brand JJ (1975) Motion sickness. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  84. Rebenitsch L, Owen C (2016) Review on cybersickness in applications and visual displays. Virtual Real 20:101–125. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Riccio GE, Stoffregen TA (1991) An ecological theory of motion sickness and postural instability. Ecol Psychol 3:195–240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Riecke BE, Jordan JD (2015) Comparing the effectiveness of different displays in enhancing illusions of self-movement (vection). Front Psychol 6:713. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Riecke BE, Schulte-Pelkum J, Avraamides MN, Heyde MVD, Bülthoff HH (2006) Cognitive factors can influence self-motion perception (vection) in virtual reality. ACM Trans Appl Percept (TAP) 3:194–216. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Robillard G, Bouchard S, Fournier T, Renaud P (2003) Anxiety and presence during VR immersion: a comparative study of the reactions of phobic and non-phobic participants in therapeutic virtual environments derived from computer games. CyberPsychol Behav 6:467–476. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Rothbaum BO, Price M, Jovanovic T, Norrholm SD, Gerardi M, Dunlop B et al (2014) A randomized, double-blind evaluation of D-cycloserine or alprazolam combined with virtual reality exposure therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder in Iraq and Afghanistan War veterans. Am J Psychiatry 171:640–648. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Ruddle RA (2004) The effect of environment characteristics and user interaction on levels of virtual environment sickness. Proc IEEE Virtual Real 2004:141. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Ruddle RA, Volkova E, Bülthoff HH (2011) Walking improves your cognitive map in environments that are large-scale and large in extent. ACM Trans Comput Hum Interact (TOCHI) 18:10. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Sargunam SP, Moghadam KR, Suhail M, Ragan ED (2017) Guided head rotation and amplified head rotation: evaluating semi-natural travel and viewing techniques in virtual reality. Proc IEEE Virtual Real 2017:19–28. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Schubert T, Friedmann F, Regenbrecht H (2001) The experience of presence: factor analytic insights. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environ 10:266–281. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Seay AF, Krum DM, Hodges L, Ribarsky W (2002) Simulator sickness and presence in a high field-of-view virtual environment. CHI’02 Ext Abstr Hum Factors Comput Syst:784–785.
  95. Skarbez R, Brooks FJ, Whitton MC (2017) A survey of presence and related concepts. ACM Comput Surv 50:96. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Slater M (2009) Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci 364:3549–3557. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Slater M, Steed A (2000) A virtual presence counter. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environ 9:413–434. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Slater M, Wilbur S (1997) A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environ 6:603–616. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Smart LJ, Stoffregen TA, Bardy BG (2002) Visually induced motion sickness predicted by postural instability. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc 44:451–465. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Smart LJ, Otten EW, Strang AJ, Littman EM, Cook HE (2014) Influence of complexity and coupling of optic flow on visually induced motion sickness. Ecol Psychol 26(4):301–324. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Souman JL, Giordano PR, Schwaiger M, Frissen I, Thümmel T, Ulbrich H, De Luca A, Bülthoff HH, Ernst MO (2011) CyberWalk: enabling unconstrained omnidirectional walking through virtual environments. ACM Trans Appl Perception 8:25. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Steinicke F, Visell Y, Campos JL, Lécuyer A (2013) Human walking in virtual environments: perception, technology, and applications. Springer, VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Stoffregen TA, Smart LJ (1998) Postural instability precedes motion sickness. Brain Res Bull 47:437–448. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Stoffregen TA, Hettinger LJ, Haas MW, Roe MM, Smart LJ (2000) Postural instability and motion sickness in a fixed-base flight simulator. Hum Factors 42:458–469. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Stoffregen TA, Faugloire E, Yoshida K, Flanagan MB, Merhi O (2008) Motion sickness and postural sway in console video games. Hum Factors 50:322–331. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Stoffregen TA, Yoshida K, Villard S, Scibora L, Bardy BG (2010) Stance width influences postural stability and motion sickness. Ecol Psychol 22:169–191. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Stoffregen TA, Chen FC, Varlet M, Alcantara C, Bardy BG (2013) Getting your sea legs. PLoS ONE. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Stoffregen TA, Chen YC, Koslucher FC (2014) Motion control, motion sickness, and the postural dynamics of mobile devices. Expe Brain Res 232:1389–1397. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Villard SJ, Flanagan MB, Albanese GM, Stoffregen TA (2008) Postural instability and motion sickness in a virtual moving room. Hum Factors 50:332–345. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Vlahović S, Suznjevic M, Skorin-Kapov L (2018) Subjective Assessment of Different Locomotion Techniques in Virtual Reality Environments. In: 2018 tenth international conference on quality of multimedia experience, pp 1–3.
  111. Webb NA, Griffin MJ (2003) Eye movement, vection, and motion sickness with foveal and peripheral vision. Aviat Space Environ Med 74:622–625Google Scholar
  112. Weech S, Moon J, Troje NF (2018) Influence of bone-conducted vibration on simulator sickness in virtual reality. PLoS ONE. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. Weech S, Kenny S, Barnett-Cowan M (2019) Presence and cybersickness in virtual reality are negatively related: a review. Front Psychol 10:158. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Wilson JR, Nichols S, Haldane C (1997) Presence and side effects: complementary or contradictory? Advances in human factors/ergonomics: 889–892Google Scholar
  115. Witmer BG, Singer MJ (1998) Measuring presence in virtual environments: a presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environ 7:225–240. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Witmer BG, Bailey JH, Knerr BW, Parsons KC (1996) Virtual spaces and real world places: transfer of route knowledge. Int J Hum Comput Stud 45:413–428. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Yokota Y, Aoki M, Mizuta K, Ito Y, Isu N (2005) Motion sickness susceptibility associated with visually induced postural instability and cardiac autonomic responses in healthy subjects. Acta Otolaryngol 125:280–285. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Zacharias GL, Young LR (1981) Influence of combined visual and vestibular cues on human perception and control of horizontal rotation. Exp Brain Res 41:159–171. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of PsychologyUniversity of WollongongWollongongAustralia

Personalised recommendations