This paper discusses the predicted increase in the occurrence and severity of motion sickness in selfdriving cars. Self-driving cars have the potential to lead to significant benefits. From the driver's perspective, the direct benefits of this technology are considered increased comfort and productivity. However, we here show that the envisaged scenarios all lead to an increased risk of motion sickness. As such, the benefits this technology is assumed to bring may not be capitalised on, in particular by those already susceptible to motion sickness. This can negatively affect user acceptance and uptake and, in turn, limit the potential socioeconomic benefits that this emerging technology may provide. Following a discussion on the causes of motion sickness in the context of self-driving cars, we present guidelines to steer the design and development of automated vehicle technologies. The aim is to limit or avoid the impact of motion sickness and ultimately promote the uptake of self-driving cars. Attention is also given to less well known consequences of motion sickness, in particular negative aftereffects such as postural instability, and detrimental effects on task performance and how this may impact the use and design of self-driving cars. We conclude that basic perceptual mechanisms need to be considered in the design process whereby self-driving cars cannot simply be thought of as living rooms, offices, or entertainment venues on wheels.

Carsickness is associated with a mismatch between actual and anticipated sensory signals. Occupants of automated vehicles, especially when using a display, are at higher risk of becoming carsick than drivers of conventional vehicles. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of positioning of in-vehicle displays, and subsequent available peripheral vision, on carsickness of passengers. We hypothesized that increased peripheral vision during display use would reduce carsickness. Seated in the front passenger seat 18 participants were driven a 15-min long slalom on two occasions while performing a continuous visual search-task. The display was positioned either at 1) eye-height in front of the windscreen, allowing peripheral view on the outside world, and 2) the height of the glove compartment, allowing only limited view on the outside world. Motion sickness was reported at 1-min intervals. Using a display at windscreen height resulted in less carsickness compared to a display at glove compartment height.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Objective: This study explores the role of anticipation in motion sickness. We compared three conditions varying in motion predictability and assessed the effect of anticipation on subsequent illness ratings using a within-subjects design. Background: Anticipation is thought to play a role in motion sickness by reducing the discrepancy between sensed and expected sensory information. However, both the exact role and potential magnitude of anticipation on motion sickness are unknown. Method: Participants ( N = 17) were exposed to three 15-min conditions consisting of repeated fore-aft motion on a sled on a 40-m rail (1) at constant intervals and consistent motion direction, (2) at constant intervals but varied motion direction, and (3) at varied intervals but consistent motion direction. Conditions were otherwise identical in motion intensity and displacement, as they were composed of the same repetitions of identical blocks of motion. Illness ratings were recorded at 1-min intervals using an 11-point motion sickness scale. Results: Average illness ratings after exposure were significantly lower for the predictable condition, compared with both the directionally unpredictable condition and the temporally unpredictable condition. Conclusion: Unpredictable motion is significantly more provocative compared with predictable motion. Findings suggest motion sickness results from a discrepancy between sensed and expected motion, rather than from unpreparedness to motion. Application: This study underlines the importance of an individual’s anticipation to motion in motion sickness. Furthermore, this knowledge could be used in domains such as that of autonomous vehicles to reduce carsickness.

The aim of this study was to explore the frequency response of visually induced motion sickness (VIMS) for oscillating linear motion in the foreand-aft axis. Background: Simulators, virtual environments, and commercially available video games that create an illusion of self-motion are often reported to induce the symptoms seen in response to true motion. Often this human response can be the limiting factor in the acceptability and usability of such systems. Whereas motion sickness in physically moving environments is known to peak at an oscillation frequency around 0.2 Hz, it has recently been suggested that VIMS peaks at around 0.06 Hz following the proposal that the summed response of the visual and vestibular selfmotion systems is maximized at this frequency. Methods: We exposed 24 participants to random dot optical flow patterns simulating oscillating foreand-aft motion within the frequency range of 0.025 to 1.6 Hz. Before and after each 20-min exposure, VIMS was assessed with the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire. Also, a standard motion sickness scale was used to rate symptoms at 1-min intervals during each trial. Results: VIMS peaked between 0.2 and 0.4 Hz with a reducing effect at lower and higher frequencies. Conclusion: The numerical prediction of the "crossover frequency" hypothesis, and the design guidance curve previously proposed, cannot be accepted when the symptoms are purely visually induced. Application: In conditions in which stationary observers are exposed to optical flow that simulates oscillating fore-and-aft motion, frequencies around 0.2 to 0.4 Hz should be avoided.