Cybersickness is often experienced when viewing virtual environments through head-mounted displays (HMDs). This study examined whether vection (i.e., illusory self-motion) and mismatches between perceived and physical head motions contribute to such adverse experiences. Observers made oscillatory yaw head rotations while viewing stereoscopic optic flow through an Oculus Rift HMD. Vection and cybersickness were measured under 3 conditions of visual compensation for physical head movements: "compensated", "uncompensated", and "inversely compensated". When a nearer aperture was simulated by the HMD, vection was found to be strongest in the "compensated" condition and weakest in the "inversely compensated" condition. However, vection was similar for all 3 conditions during full-field exposures. Cybersickness was most severe for the "inversely compensated" condition, but was not different for the other two conditions. We conclude that mismatches between perceived and physical head-movements can contribute strongly to cybersickness. The relationship between vection and cybersickness is weaker and appears complex. Cybersickness is often experienced when viewing virtual environments through headmounted displays (HMDs). This study examined whether vection (i.e., illusory self-motion) and mismatches between perceived and physical head motions contribute to such adverse experiences. Observers made oscillatory yaw head rotations while viewing stereoscopic optic flow through an Oculus Rift HMD. Vection and cybersickness were measured under 3 conditions of visual compensation for physical head movements: "compensated", "uncompensated", and "inversely compensated". When a nearer aperture was simulated by the HMD, vection was found to be strongest in the "compensated" condition and weakest in the "inversely compensated" condition. However, vection was similar for all 3 conditions during full-field exposures. Cybersickness was most severe for the "inversely compensated" condition, but was not different for the other two conditions. We conclude that mismatches between perceived and physical head-movements can contribute strongly to cybersickness. The relationship between vection and cybersickness is weaker and appears complex.

Sounds are thought to contribute to the perceptions of self-motion, often via higher-level, cognitive mechanisms. This study examined whether illusory self-motion (i.e. vection) could be induced by auditory metaphorical motion stimulation (without providing any spatialized or low-level sensory information consistent with self-motion). Five different types of auditory stimuli were presented in mono to our 20 blindfolded, stationary participants (via a loud speaker array): (1) an ascending Shepard-Risset glissando; (2) a descending Shepard-Risset glissando; (3) a combined Shepard-Risset glissando; (4) a combined-adjusted (loudness-controlled) Shepard-Risset glissando; and (5) a white-noise control stimulus. We found that auditory vection was consistently induced by all four Shepard-Risset glissandi compared to the white-noise control. This metaphorical auditory vection appeared similar in strength to the vection induced by the visual reference stimulus simulating vertical self-motion. Replicating past visual vection findings, we also found that individual differences in postural instability appeared to significantly predict auditory vection strength ratings. These findings are consistent with the notion that auditory contributions to self-motion perception may be predominantly due to higher-level cognitive factors.

No abstract

Abstract We recently showed that auditory illusions of self-motion can be induced in the absence of physically accurate spatial cues (Mursic et al., 2017). The current study was aimed at identifying which features of this auditory stimulus (the Shepard–Risset glissando) were responsible for this metaphorical auditory vection, as well as confirming anecdotal reports of motion sickness for this stimulus. Five different types of auditory stimuli were presented to 31 blindfolded, stationary participants through a loudspeaker array: (1) a descending Shepard–Risset glissando; (2) a descending discrete Shepard scale; (3) a descending sweep signal; (4) a phase-scrambled version of (1) (auditory control type 1); and (5) white noise (auditory control type 2). We found that the auditory vection induced by the Shepard–Risset glissando was stronger than both types of auditory control, and the discrete Shepard scale stimulus. However, vection strength was not found to differ between the Shepard–Risset glissando and the sweep signal. This suggests that the continuous, gliding structure of both these auditory stimuli was integral to the induction of vection. Consistent with anecdotal reports that the Shepard–Risset glissando is also capable of generating motion sickness (as measured by the Fast Motion Sickness Scale and the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire), the likelihood and severity of sickness for these stimuli was found to increase with the strength of the auditory vection.

This study investigated claims of disrupted equilibrium when listening to the Shepard–Risset glissando (which creates an auditory illusion of perpetually ascending/descending pitch). During each trial, 23 participants stood quietly on a force plate for 90 s with their eyes either open or closed (30 s pre-sound, 30 s of sound and 30 s post-sound). Their centre of foot pressure (CoP) was continuously recorded during the trial and a verbal measure of illusory self-motion (i.e., vection) was obtained directly afterwards. As expected, vection was stronger during Shepard–Risset glissandi than during white noise or phase-scrambled auditory control stimuli. Individual differences in auditorily evoked postural sway (observed during sound) were also found to predict the strength of this vection. Importantly, the patterns of sway induced by Shepard–Risset glissandi differed significantly from those during our auditory control stimuli — but only in terms of their temporal dynamics. Since significant sound type differences were not seen in terms of sway magnitude, this stresses the importance of investigating the temporal dynamics of sound–posture interactions.