This paper investigates the impact of virtual reality (VR) on the performance of individuals operating in stressful environments. Not only is there a light analysis of the impact that low-fidelity and high-fidelity VR experiences have on individuals in occupationally stressful situations, but it also explored the effects of VR exposure on the psychological and physiological human conditions. Previous research and literature on the relationship between VR and human performance was also explored. In conclusion, this paper explicitly outlines how the application of VR assists in the overall performance of individuals operating in stressful environments.
Keywords: Virtual Reality (VR), operational performance, high fidelity, low fidelity
The Effects of VR on Operational Performance: A Qualitative Study
In the past two decades, there has been an enormous development in the creation and application of Virtual Reality (VR) technology. To assist in this technological innovation, there has been much investigation into the nature of VR, its relationship to its users, as well as its societal impacts. As first proposed in the mid-1960’s, Sutherland (1965) described VR technology as a window where the user perceives a virtual world as if it sounds, looks, and feels real, and where one could act in a realistic manner. Another useful definition was created by researchers Hale, Stanney, and Badcock (2015), outlining how VR is an artificial environment that immerses users in an alternate world, stimulating multiple senses and providing vibrant experiences that are so veridical that they fundamentally transform those exposed in ways such as training, educating or entertaining. Although several varying interpretations of VR exist, there are a few important and necessary characteristics included in the design of this technology. As further described by Hale, Stanney, and Baddcock (2015), VR technology must provide the individual with an immersive experience derived through environmental, spatial, and multisensory realism that is capable of producing a graphical interface with integrated audio, user-generated goals and activities, personalized content, the feeling of presence, as well as a consistent world that exists even after a user withdrawals from it.
There are two main types of VR experiences that are seen in a spectrum of differing technologies and devices, being either low-fidelity or high-fidelity systems. A low-fidelity VR system is the simplest and often the cheapest type of application. Producing the least amount of realism and immersion, this technology is typically reliant on monitors that reproduce real-world images. High-fidelity VR systems are much more advanced and immersive, providing the user with an extremely realistic simulation experience through state-of-the-art audio and haptic devices. These VR technologies, both high-fidelity and low-fidelity systems, can be found throughout most industries including entertainment, automotive, retail and education, as well as more stressful occupational environments such as healthcare workers, military personnel, pilots, and astronauts. Despite its growing use, the implications that these devices have on an individual’s performance, specifically those who operate in stressful and high-risk environments, is not as transparent. Through an extensive review of the previous research and literature regarding VR, it is intended that the effects and impacts that this technology has on the physiological and psychological states of individuals operating in these stressful environments will become clear. This will be done in the hopes of increasing occupational safety and performance through VR, as well as contributing to the technology’s innovation and progressive application.
Literature Review
To understand the overall effects that exposure to Virtual Reality (VR) has on an individual’s operational performance, several factors need to be investigated. Specifically, this includes the impact of this technology on a human’s physiological state, the effects of VR on an individual’s psychological well-being, and what is already understood about human performance and functioning in relation to VR. These topics will be explored with the intent of shedding light on this technology’s impact on an individual’s performance in a stressful operational environment.
VR and Human Physiology
Although research is still developing, it is well-known that VR usage has profound effects on human physiology. As best outlined by researchers Lavoie, Main, King, and King (2020), VR has been shown to produce physiological responses including postural instability and physical discomfort, as well as notable changes in heart rate, blood pressure, and cortisol (stress) levels. The most common symptoms of VR use, often being referred to as “simulator sickness,” is like motion sickness and includes feelings of vertigo, dizziness, and eye strain. The use of VR systems, specifically in the format of headsets, have also been found to induce unnatural patterns of eye movement (Duking, Holmberg and Sperlich, 2018), while the visual stimuli that is present in this technology has been linked to epilepsy, loss in visual acuity, change in ocular alignment, and a notable reduction in depth perception (Sharky, 1996). Several of these drawbacks and limitations of VR can be seen in low-fidelity systems where tracking errors occur, as well as delays between the user’s motion and display regeneration (Sharky, 1996). It should also be noted that many of these negative responses, including balance disturbances, postural discomfort, disorientation, dizziness, eye strain, and vertigo, are often experienced after exposure to the VR simulation, when the user returns to the real world (Kennedy and Lilienthal, 1995). Although this allows room for mitigative measures, the current potential of experiencing these VR symptoms can have direct and severe implications for operational safety and performance, especially within stressful occupations such as astronauts and military personnel.
Despite the various negative implications of VR on human physiology, there are several benefits that need to be addressed, such as the use of VR for physical rehabilitation, training, and exercise. As researchers Rooij, Port and Meijer (2016) have discovered, VR technology has the potential of improving an individual’s upper extremity motor function, as well as assisting in an individual’s balance and gait ability through repetitive and variable training. This enhancement in motor performance, learning, and physical recovery is extremely important in understanding the relationship of VR technology with individuals operating in stressful, high-risk environments.
VR and Human Psychology
The impact that VR has on an individual’s cognitive and psychological state is a surprisingly controversial research topic. The most crucial psychological impact that VR has on its users is the feeling of presence and immersion, which has been found by researcher Sharkey (1996) to directly assist in the users spatial learning. Furthermore, researchers Gao et al. (2019) discovered that VR can significantly assist in improving the attentional fatigue and negative mood of the participants through the exposure to green, nature-like VR environments which inspires higher levels of emotional arousal and lower levels of stress. As further outlined by researchers Williams et al. (2017), VR is also a valuable tool for increasing the user’s patience and empathy. With the ability to deliver different tasks within a secure, controlled, and eco-friendly environment, VR technology appears to be an appropriate tool for evaluating an individual’s cognitive functions (Cipresso et al., 2014). This leads to the belief that VR can greatly assist in therapeutic and rehabilitative measures relating to individual cognition, as well as presenting the opportunity for new forms of communication and learning.
Neurologically, the known side effects of VR do not seem to represent a serious barrier to its application and continued use (Sharky, 1996); However, several researchers have noted the negative implications and effects that VR has on its users. Specifically, VR has been found to have a significant correlation with negative rumination, or a maladaptive form of self-reflection characterized by repetitive and passive thought patterns focusing on the symptoms and causes related to the distressing event, which can be a powerful source of anxiety and depression (Nolen-Hoeksema, 1991). Other negative effects of VR exposure include a reduction in cognitive performance, feelings of temporal dissociation, and increased mental fatigue (Lavoie, Main, King and King, 2020). It should also be mentioned that although it has been previously thought that VR is suitable in mitigating the feelings of isolation (Sharky, 1996), this technology presents a clear threat for decreasing overall social interactions and human connection (Duking, Holmberg and Sperlich, 2018).
VR and Human Performance
To better understand the true relationship between VR and the performance of individuals operating in stressful environments, an extensive review of the previous research and literature on the subject needs to be conducted with an initial investigation into the various factors that determine performance. As best outlined by researchers Alas and Kumpikaite (2009), a person’s performance depends on the interaction of motivation, their environment, and their knowledge, skills, and attitude. With this, the underlying question is whether VR technology can promote these factors to optimize human performance in the operational setting. Through an investigation conducted by researchers Rooij, Port, and Meijer (2016), VR training has been found to not only improve the user’s motivation, but is directly related to the improvement of the users quality of life and feelings of safety. This can also be attributed to the technological ability within VR systems to immerse oneself into a specific, personalized environment that can directly aid in the user’s positive feelings and assurance. There are also several ways in which VR technology aids and promotes the user’s knowledge, skills, and attitudes. As discovered by researchers Siu et al. (2016), VR systems are capable of interactively impacting the user’s level of knowledge acquisition, cognitive decay, and maintenance of skills. VR technology has also been found to enable remote learning and training, leading to the improvement of a wide variety of skills such as decision-making and pacing strategies that optimize the utilization of energy within the workplace (Duking, Holmberg and Sperlich, 2018).
The VR systems level of fidelity and exposure duration in relation to human performance also needs to be explored. As outlined by researchers Stanney, Hale, Nahmens, and Kennedy (2003), as well as several others, the adverse effects of VR are related directly to increased exposure to this technology. In other words, the increased use of VR systems leads to a potential increase in experiencing the negative effects of VR. It has also been found that objective and subjective measures of performance in VR environments increase as more sensory cues are delivered; however, the increase in informational content, even if it disrupts fidelity, has been found to better enhance the user’s performance and application of skills (Cooper et al,, 2018). In fact, as further stated by researchers Cooper et al. (2018), a high level of simulator fidelity has little-to-no effects on skill transfer, suggesting that lower fidelity simulation can reduce complexity and enhance focus on training. These findings, although controversial, are crucial in understanding the impact of VR technology on human performance.
Results
The above literature review of VR and its impact on the different aspects of human functioning shows an interesting relationship between this technology and the performance of individuals operating in stressful environments. Not only were the physiological and psychological implications of using this technology explicitly outlined, but other technological drawbacks were also noted such as obtrusive, restricting, and harmful designs that result in some of these negative effects of VR usage. Moreover, as outlined above by researchers Stanney, Hale, Nahmens, and Kennedy (2003), there is a high cost for increasing the duration of experience, as well as the level of fidelity and immersion sensation, which does not equate to an increase in operational performance. Despite these drawbacks and weaknesses of VR technology, there seemed to be far more beneficial aspects outlined in the analysis above. As best stated by Sharky (1996), VR permits the user to learn by making mistakes without suffering the real consequences of their errors. Allowing the user to exhibit creative, repetitive, and testing behaviors or tasks that could otherwise not be performed in the real occupational setting is crucial for the training of individuals operating stressful, high-risk environments such as healthcare workers, military personnel, pilots, and astronauts. This flexibility of the VR experience and system design is also a critical aspect of this technology in the sense that it allows an individual or group of people to have a custom, personalized experience through complex and adaptive algorithms. As noted in the above analysis, VR systems can also increase the user’s mood, mitigate stress, promote positive characteristics such as patience and empathy, and provide both mental and physical rehabilitation. Moreover, these systems can be used as an alternative communication tool which can be especially useful for astronauts and military personnel.
In short, the use of VR systems have shown to promote an individual’s motivation and overall attitude, their feelings of presence and connection to their environment, their knowledge and skills, as well as their overall mental and physical health. However, this seems to largely depend on the level of VR immersion and fidelity, as well as the system design and duration of the experience. Being that VR technology are flexible systems that can supply different experiences to the user, ensuring that there is a right mix of immersion, fidelity, duration and effective system designs is the key to optimizing human performance in stressful, high-risk occupational settings.
Conclusion
As outlined by Rose (1996), VR is a tool that allows us to temporarily isolate a person from their normal sensory environment and substitute for it an artificial computer-generated environment built to the precise specifications of the programmer (P. 5). These tools are applied to several occupations and industries with the goal of optimizing human performance and the overall human experience. Despite the known drawbacks and limitations, VR technology has proven to optimize the performance of those operating in high-stress, high-risk environments.
With this, the continued application of VR technology is crucial for the minimization of workplace errors and the assurance of occupational safety, as well as the increase of operational performance for those working in risky and stressful environments. Despite this, there are several stipulations that should be discussed and potentially enforced to ensure these positive results with its application. This includes the reduction of fidelity while implementing informational training cues, and much-needed advancements in VR system designs such as enhanced resolution, reduction in unwanted system feedback, and more ergonomic designs of the devices themselves to better fit the users. It is also suggested that these systems employ a multi-user design for the training, oversight, education, research, and assistance of the individuals using VR for occupational purposes. Moreover, the implementation of duration and experience restrictions is necessary for reducing the noted negative effects that is experienced with the use of this technology. Although it has been made clear that VR is effective in optimizing human performance for individuals in operating in stressful environments, the suggestions noted above should be investigated further with the intent of ensuring this optimization and positive benefits of using this technology.
References
Alas, R., & Kumpikaite, V. (2009). Factor Determining Human Performance at Work: Students’ Viewpoint. Insights into the Sustainable Growth of Business: Proceedings of the International Scientific Conference, 1-11.
Annerstedt, M., Jonsson, P., Wallergard, M., Johansson, G., Karlson, B., Grahn, P., . . . Wahrborg, P. (2013). Inducing Physiological Stress Recovery with Sounds of Nature in a Virtual Reality Forest – Results from a Pilot Study. Physiology & Behavior, 118, 240-250. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2013.05.023
Calabrò, R. S., Naro, A., Russo, M., Leo, A., Luca, R. D., Balletta, T., . . . Bramanti, P. (2017). The Role of Virtual Reality in Improving Motor Performance as Revealed by EEG: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 14(1). doi:10.1186/s12984-017-0268-4
Cipresso, P., Albani, G., Serino, S., Pedroli, E., Pallavicini, F., Mauro, A., & Riva, G. (2014). Virtual Multiple Errands Test (VMET): A Virtual Reality-Based Tool to Detect Early Executive Functions Deficit in Parkinson Disease. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 8. doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00405
Cooper, N., Milella, F., Pinto, C., Cant, I., White, M., & Meyer, G. (2018). The Effects of Substitute Multisensory Feedback on Task Performance and the Sense of Presence in a Virtual Reality Environment. Plos One, 13(2). doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0191846
Düking, P., Holmberg, H., & Sperlich, B. (2018). The Potential Usefulness of Virtual Reality Systems for Athletes: A Short SWOT Analysis. Frontiers in Physiology, 9. doi:10.3389/fphys.2018.00128
Gao, Zhang, Zhu, & Qiu. (2019). Exploring Psychophysiological Restoration and Individual Preference in the Different Environments Based on Virtual Reality. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(17). doi:10.3390/ijerph16173102
Hale, K. S., & Stanney, K. M. (2015). Handbook of virtual environments design, implementation, and applications (2nd ed.). Boca Raton ; London ; New York, FL: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
Kennedy, R., & Lilienthal, M. (n.d.). Implications of Balance Disturbances Following Exposure to Virtual Reality Systems. Proceedings Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium 95. doi:10.1109/vrais.1995.512477
Lavoie, R., Main, K., King, C., & King, D. (2020). Virtual Experience, Real Consequences: The Potential Negative Emotional Consequences of Virtual Reality Gameplay. Virtual Reality. doi:10.1007/s10055-020-00440-y
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1991). Responses to Depression and Their Effects on the Duration of Depressive Episodes. Journal of abnormal psychology, 100(4), 569.
Rooij, I. J., Port, I. G., & Meijer, J. G. (2016). Effect of Virtual Reality Training on Balance and Gait Ability in Patients with Stroke: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Physical Therapy, 96(12), 1905-1918. doi:10.2522/ptj.20160054
Rose, F. D. (1996). Virtual Reality in Rehabilitation Following Traumatic Brain Injury. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technology (pp. 5-12).
Sharkey, P. M. (1996). Proceedings: The 1st European Conference on Disability, Virtual Reality and Associated Technologies, 8, 9, 10 July, 1996, Maidenhead, UK. Reading: University of Reading.
Siu, K., Best, B. J., Kim, J. W., Oleynikov, D., & Ritter, F. E. (2016). Adaptive Virtual Reality Training to Optimize Military Medical Skills Acquisition and Retention. Military Medicine, 181(5S), 214-220. doi:10.7205/milmed-d-15-00164
Stanney, K. M., Hale, K. S., Nahmens, I., & Kennedy, R. S. (2003). What to Expect from Immersive Virtual Environment Exposure: Influences of Gender, Body Mass Index, and Past Experience. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 45(3), 504-520. doi:10.1518/hfes.45.3.504.27254
Sutherland, I. E. (1965). The Ultimate Display. Multimedia: From Wagner to Virtual Reality. New York, NY: Norton.
Vincenzi, D., Mouloua, M., Hancock, P., & Wise, J. (2008). Human factors in simulation and training (1st ed.). Boca Raton, Fl., FL: CRC Press.
Waytz, A., Hershfield, H. E., & Tamir, D. I. (2015). Mental Simulation and Meaning in Life. Journal of personality and social psychology, 108(2), 336–355. doi:10.1037/a0038322
Williams, B., Reddy, P., Marshall, S., Beovich, B., & McKarney, L. (2017). Simulation and Mental Health Outcomes: A Scoping Review. Advances in simulation (London, England), 2, 2. doi:10.1186/s41077-016-0035-9
Zhou, N.-N., & Deng, Y.-L. (2009). Virtual Reality: A State-Of-The-Art Survey. International Journal of Automation and Computing, 6(4), 319–325. doi:10.1007/s11633-009-0319-9
Originally created by Samantha Colangelo to fulfill requirements for Embry Riddle Aeronautical University’s Master of Science program in Human Factors. July, 2020.
Samantha Colangelo 