Effects of End-to-end Latency on User Experience and Performance in Immersive Virtual Reality Applications

Immersive virtual reality (IVR) offers an opportunity to immerse oneself into a virtual world and experience an exciting adventure. However, latency between a user’s movement and visual feedback has a big impact on user experience and performance. In this paper, we explore the effect of increased end-to-end latency in IVR applications by conducting a user study. Firstly, in the searching task, we analyze cybersickness level based on simulator sickness questionnaire. Secondly, in the reaching task, we measure the user performance by tracking the time they need to reach a target and the error they make during the execution. Lastly, in the embodiment task, we measure the sense of body ownership, agency, presence, and latency perception when only one body side is impaired by latency. We apply the Friedman test with Conover’s test of multiple comparisons as a post-hoc test on all dependent variables to find significant results. Results show that the end-to-end latency above 63 ms induces significant cybersickness symptoms. In addition, user performance decreases with increasing delay and with end-to-end latency above 69 ms, the users need significantly longer to complete the task. Results also show that end-to-end latency affects body ownership significant later, namely, not until 101 ms.

[1]  Robert S. Kennedy,et al.  Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. , 1993 .

[2]  Li Li,et al.  The Accuracy and Precision of Position and Orientation Tracking in the HTC Vive Virtual Reality System for Scientific Research , 2017, i-Perception.

[3]  Christian Reuter,et al.  Identifying Cybersickness through Heart Rate Variability alterations , 2019, Int. J. Virtual Real..

[4]  Marc Erich Latoschik,et al.  Effects of Latency Jitter on Simulator Sickness in a Search Task , 2018, 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR).

[5]  Julie M. Drexler,et al.  Cybersickness is Not Simulator Sickness , 1997 .

[6]  Anthony Steed,et al.  Measuring Latency in Virtual Environments , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[7]  James R. Lackner,et al.  Motion Sickness Side Effects and Aftereffects of Immersive Virtual Environments Created with Helmet-Mounted Visual Displays , 2000 .

[8]  Michael F. Korpi,et al.  Factors Affecting Enjoyment of Virtual Reality Games: A Comparison Involving Consumer-Grade Virtual Reality Technology. , 2019, Games for health journal.

[9]  Michiteru Kitazaki,et al.  Illusory body ownership of an invisible body interpolated between virtual hands and feet via visual-motor synchronicity , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[10]  Katerina Mania,et al.  The effect of tracking delay on awareness states in immersive virtual environments: an initial exploration , 2011, VRCAI '11.

[11]  Stefan Kopp,et al.  The impact of latency on perceptual judgments and motor performance in closed-loop interaction in virtual reality , 2016, VRST.

[12]  M. Whitton,et al.  Effect of latency on presence in stressful virtual environments , 2003, IEEE Virtual Reality, 2003. Proceedings..

[13]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  Reaching for objects in VR displays: lag and frame rate , 1994, TCHI.

[14]  Alex Perdomo,et al.  Applying latency to half of a self-avatar's body to change real walking patterns , 2015, 2015 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR).

[15]  Nadine Rauh,et al.  System Latency Guidelines Then and Now - Is Zero Latency Really Considered Necessary? , 2017, HCI.

[16]  Ryugo Kijima,et al.  Effect of HMD latency on human stability during quiescent standing on one foot , 2016, 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI).

[17]  Joohwan Kim,et al.  Latency Requirements for Foveated Rendering in Virtual Reality , 2017, ACM Trans. Appl. Percept..

[18]  Takayuki Ito,et al.  Malleable Embodiment: Changing Sense of Embodiment by Spatial-Temporal Deformation of Virtual Human Body , 2017, CHI.