Postural Activity During Use of a Head-Mounted Display: Sex Differences in the “Driver–Passenger” Effect

Abstract

Motion sickness is common in virtual environments. The risk of motion sickness varies widely between individuals and across situations. The subjective experience of motion sickness often is preceded by distinctive patterns of movement in the control of head and body posture. Previous research has documented reliable sex differences in the kinematics of postural activity, as well as reliable differences in postural activity between participants who were in control of a virtual vehicle and participants who were not. We asked whether postural precursors of motion sickness would simultaneously be influenced by individual and situational factors. We analyzed movement of the head and torso while seated participants were exposed to a driving video game presented through a head-mounted display. Half of the participants were women, and half were men. Using a yoked-control design, half of the participants controlled the virtual vehicle (Drivers), whereas half watched previously recorded vehicle trajectories (Passengers). The maximum exposure duration was 15 min, but participants were instructed to discontinue participation immediately if they experienced any symptoms of motion sickness, however mild. We analyzed movement kinematics not only in terms of sex and vehicle control but also in terms of participants who did or did not report motion sickness. Movement differed between Drivers and Passengers, in terms of both the spatial magnitude and multifractality of movement. The spatial magnitude of movement was simultaneously influenced by sex (men vs. women) and vehicle control (Drivers vs. Passengers). In addition, in statistically significant interactions, we identified postural precursors of motion sickness that differed between Drivers and Passengers and, separately, between Drivers and Passengers as a function of sex. The results are consistent with a prediction of the postural instability theory of motion sickness etiology and shed new light on the multifactorial origins of postural precursors of motion sickness in virtual environments.

Measuring the susceptibility to visually induced motion sickness and its relationship with vertigo, dizziness, migraine, syncope and personality traits

“…The role of biological sex for motion sickness and VIMS has been largely discussed in the past with mixed results. For instance, it has been often stated that females are more susceptible to classical motion sickness (Jokerst et al 1999 ; Dobie et al 2001 ) and VIMS (Flanagan et al 2005 ; Munafo et al 2017 ; Curry et al 2020a , b ) than males, whereas other studies failed to find this sex-related difference (see reviews in Lawson 2014 ; Lawson et al 2021 ). In the present study, males appeared slightly more susceptible overall for VIMS, albeit this effect was small and our findings do not suggest strong differences between males and females with regards to VIMS susceptibility.…”

“…By contrast, exactly the opposite effects have been observed in dancers and figure skaters, who showed reduced motion sickness susceptibility which may be related to their training (Tanguy et al 2008 ; Nigmatulina et al 2015 ). Furthermore, it is possible that VIMS and motion sickness susceptibility is related to individual differences in motor control, motor skill, and/or motor learning, and it has been conjectured that it might also be related to biological sex (Munafo et al 2017 ; Curry et al 2020a , b ). In general, the situation with these variables is complicated by the fact that they can have both the properties of a state (i.e.…”

Using quantitative data on postural activity to develop methods to predict and prevent cybersickness

“…Over more than 2 decades, this prediction has been confirmed in a wide variety of settings. The prediction has been confirmed in relation to movement during exposure (e.g., Merhi et al, 2007;Stoffregen et al, 2008;Dong et al, 2011;Curry et al, 2020a;Smart et al, 2020), but also in relation to movement before participants were exposed to any motion stimuli (e.g., Munafo et al, 2017;Curry et al, 2020b). In the context of cybersickness, the central prediction of the postural instability theory also has been confirmed in an increasingly wide range of independent laboratories (e.g., Cook et al, 2018;Weech et al, 2018;Risi and Palmisano, 2019;Teixeira and Palmisano, 2021).…”

“…Before the onset of subjective symptoms, postural precursors of motion sickness during exposure to visual motion stimuli have been identified in laboratory devices, (Stoffregen et al, 2010;Koslucher et al, 2014;Koslucher et al, 2016b), with projection video systems (Villard et al, 2008), with console video games (Dong et al, 2011), with tablet computers (Stoffregen et al, 2014), and in HMDs (Merhi et al, 2007;Curry et al, 2020b). The nature of these postural precursors differs between the sexes (e.g., Koslucher et al, 2016b;Curry et al, 2020b), between people who control the VR and people who are passive observers (e.g., Dong et al, 2011), and between different measures of postural kinematics, including spatial and temporal measures (e.g., Villard et al, 2008). The general effect is well-established, but additional research will be needed to identify the parameters and dependent variables that will yield optimal prediction algorithms.…”

“…Traditional analyses of this issue have focused on potential perceptual or cognitive differences between the sexes (e.g., Fulvio et al, 2021), or on the idea that reported sex differences may be an artifact of the ergonomics of headsets (e.g., Grassini and Laumann, 2020;Stanney et al, 2020a). By qualitative contrast, the existence of sex-specific postural precursors of cybersickness (e.g., Koslucher et al, 2016a;Koslucher et al, 2016b;Munafo et al, 2017;Curry et al, 2020a;Curry et al, 2020b) confirms the physical reality of sex differences in cybersickness, and opens new avenues for cybersickness interventions that are targeted at this problem. Our focus on cybersickness interventions that are tailored to individual users will naturally take into account the existence of sex-specific postural precursors of motion sickness.…”