Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36260094›Full record

SynthesisExperimental brain research2022

A meta-analysis of simulator sickness as a function of simulator fidelity.

Ksander N de Winkel, Tessa M W Talsma, Riender Happee

Open access · hybridAbstract readMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Experimental brain research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
4.9field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ksander N de WinkelDepartment of Cognitive Robotics, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, Delft, 2628CD, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands. ksander.dewinkel@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0534-2723
Tessa M W TalsmaDepartment of Cognitive Robotics, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, Delft, 2628CD, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Riender HappeeDepartment of Cognitive Robotics, Delft University of Technology, Mekelweg 2, Delft, 2628CD, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands.
Delft University of Technology · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Driving simulators are an increasingly important tool to develop vehicle functionalities and to study driver or passenger responses. A major hindrance to the use and validity of such studies is Simulator Sickness (SS). Several studies have suggested a positive relation between improvements in simulator fidelity and the likelihood of sickness. We hypothesized that this relation only holds true for static (fixed-base) simulators, and that increased fidelity in fact reduces simulator sickness in dynamic (moving-base) simulators. We performed a meta-analysis investigating the relation between sickness and fidelity in static and dynamic systems. A literature search yielded a total of 41 simulator studies that varied aspects of mechanical and/or visual fidelity and assessed SS for the same driving conditions and the same or equivalent participant groups. Evaluation of a model synthesizing the findings of these studies indicates that SS decreases with visual fidelity, and suggests that this effect may be negated for static simulators. The results of the modeling efforts thereby provide some support for the hypothesis that increased fidelity can reduce SS in dynamic simulators. Based on the evaluation of the literature we also note particular shortcomings and gaps in available research. Finally, we make recommendations for specific experiments that may fill these gaps and allow definitive conclusions on the role of simulator fidelity in SS.

Indexed as

Automobile DrivingMotion SicknessComputer SimulationHumansDrivingFidelityKinetosisMotionSicknessSimulator

Identifiers

PMID36260094
PMCPMC9678991
OpenAlexW4306765721

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.