Are Modern Head-Mounted Displays Sexist? A Systematic Review on Gender Differences in HMD-Mediated Virtual Reality

In recent years, the magnitude, consistency, and stability across time of cognitive sex differences have been questioned. The present study examined these issues in the context of spatial abilities. A meta-analysis of 286 effect sizes from a variety of spatial ability measures was conducted. Effect sizes were partitioned by the specific test used and by a number of variables related to the experimental procedure in order to achieve homogeneity. Results showed that sex differences are significant in several tests but that some intertest differences exist. Partial support was found for the notion that the magnitude of sex differences has decreased in recent years. Finally, it was found that the age of emergence of sex differences depends on the test used. Results are discussed with regard to their implications for the study of sex differences in spatial abilities.

The use of head-mounted displays (HMD) for virtual reality (VR) application-based purposes including therapy, rehabilitation, and training is increasing. Despite advancements in VR technologies, many users still experience sickness symptoms. VR sickness may be influenced by technological differences within HMDs such as resolution and refresh rate, however, VR content also plays a significant role. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to examine the literature on HMDs that report Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) scores to determine the impact of content. User factors associated with VR sickness were also examined. A systematic search was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Fifty-five articles met inclusion criteria, representing 3,016 participants (mean age range 19.5–80; 41% female). Findings show gaming content recorded the highest total SSQ mean 34.26 (95%CI 29.57–38.95). VR sickness profiles were also influenced by visual stimulation, locomotion and exposure times. Older samples (mean age ≥35 years) scored significantly lower total SSQ means than younger samples, however, these findings are based on a small evidence base as a limited number of studies included older users. No sex differences were found. Across all types of content, the pooled total SSQ mean was relatively high 28.00 (95%CI 24.66–31.35) compared with recommended SSQ cut-off scores. These findings are of relevance for informing future research and the application of VR in different contexts.

Anecdotal reports suggest that motion sickness may occur among users of contemporary, consumer-oriented head-mounted display systems and that women may be at greater risk. We evaluated the nauseogenic properties of one such system, the Oculus Rift. The head-mounted unit included motion sensors that were sensitive to users' head movements, such that head movements could be used as control inputs to the device. In two experiments, seated participants played one of two virtual reality games for up to 15 min. In Experiment 1, 22% of participants reported motion sickness, and the difference in incidence between men and women was not significant. In Experiment 2, motion sickness was reported by 56% of participants, and incidence among women (77.78%) was significantly greater than among men (33.33%). Before participants were exposed to the head-mounted display system, we recorded their standing body sway during the performance of simple visual tasks. In both experiments, patterns of pre-exposure body sway differed between participants who (later) reported motion sickness and those who did not. In Experiment 2, sex differences in susceptibility to motion sickness were preceded by sex differences in body sway. These postural effects confirm a prediction of the postural instability theory of motion sickness. The results indicate that users of contemporary head-mounted display systems are at significant risk of motion sickness and that in relation to motion sickness these systems may be sexist in their effects.