Psychophysiological changes during workspace virtualization

Aim. To estimate psychophysiological changes during workspace virtualization.

Materials and Methods. We evaluated the psychophysiological profile of 10 healthy right-handed males aged 25 to 45 years before, during and after the working in a virtual reality (VR) headset. All participants had higher education, normal or corrected to normal vision, and were experienced computer users. Psychometric testing included a neurological examination, assessment of functional and feedback-related brain activity (reaction time, errors, and missed signals) and attention span, quantification of processed symbols in the 1st and 4th minutes of Bourdon test, analysis of short-term memory (10 words, 10 numbers and 10 meaningless syllables memorization) and spatial perception, and multi-channel electroencephalography recording in rest.

Results. Deterioration of psychometric indicators after a cognitive load in a VR headset was documented only in the most difficult tasks: the number of errors increased by 93% in the brain performance test and by 65% in the attention distribution test. The analysis of electroencephalography data showed that the delta rhythm and theta1 rhythm activity decreased by 28 and 13%, respectively, after working in a VR headset as compared to baseline values, while alpha1 rhythm activity increased by 96%. Probably, the observed electroencephalography changes corresponded to the patterns of brain activation associated with cognitive load and the resulting fatigue.

Conclusions. We developed a suitable approach for the psychometric testing before and after working in VR headset, which demonstrated general tolerance and acceptable subjective difficulties to VR load. 

1. Liao YY, Chen IH, Lin YJ, Chen Y, Hsu WC. Effects of virtual reality-based physical and cognitive training on executive function and dual-task gait performance in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a randomized control trial. Front Aging Neurosci. 2019;(11):162. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00162

2. Aromaa S, Väätänen A, Aaltonen I, Goriachev V, Helin K, Karjalainen J. Awareness of the real-world environment when using augmented reality head-mounted. Appl Ergon. 2020;88:103145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103145

3. Ansado J, Chasen C, Bouchard S, Iakimova G, Northoff G. How brain imaging provides predictive biomarkers for therapeutic success in the context of virtual reality cognitive training. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2020;S0149- 7634(20)30421-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.05.018

4. Kuzmyna A.S. Vyrtualnaja realnost kak sredstvo bezopasnogo kontakta s travmyrujushhej realnostju v psyhoterapyy. Bulletin of Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia. Series : Ecology and life safety. 2014;(3):77-82. (In Russ.).

5. Indovina P, Barone D, Gallo L, Chirico A, De Pietro G, Giordano A. Virtual reality as a distraction intervention to relieve pain and distress during medical procedures: a comprehensive literature review. Clin J Pain. 2018;34(9):858- 877. https://doi.org/10.1097/AJP.0000000000000599

6. Ahmadpour N, Randall H, Choksi H, Gao A, Vaughan C, Poronnik P. Virtual reality interventions for acute and chronic pain management. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2019;(114):105568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocel.2019.105568

7. Kourtesis P, Collina S, Doumas LAA, MacPherson SE. Technological competence is a pre-condition for effective implementation of virtual reality head mounted displays in human neuroscience: a technological review and meta-analysis. Front Hum Neurosci. 2019;(13):342. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2019.00342

8. Saredakis D, Szpak A, Birckhead B, Keage HAD, Rizzo A, Loetscher T. Factors associated with virtual reality sickness in head-mounted displays: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Hum Neurosci. 2020;(14):96. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00096

9. Smyslova OV. Vojskunskij AE. Cybersickness in virtual reality: phenomenology and measurement. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. 2019;40(4):85-94. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.31857/S020595920005473-6

10. Selivanov VV, Selivanova LN. Interaction of personality and virtual reality during working with short-term programs. Psikhologiya kognitivnykh protsessov. 2018;(7):156-169 (In Russ.).

11. Selivanov VV. The theory of thinking as a process: an experimental confirmation. Experimental psychology (Russia). 2019;12(1):40-42 (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17759/exppsy.2019120104

12. Kovalev AI, Menshikova GJa. Vection in virtual environments: psychological and psychophysiological mechanisms. National psychological journal. 2015;4(20):91-104. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.11621/npj.2015.0409

13. Nite S. VR/AR enterprise insider: guidebook for virtual reality and XR. Modu XR, 2020; p.151.

14. Millais P, Jones SL, Kelly R. Exploring data in virtual reality : Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems - CHI ’18. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188537

15. Cavallo M, Dolakia M, Havlena M. Ocheltree K, Podlaseck M. Immersive insights: a hybrid analytics system for collaborative exploratory data analysis. VRST. 2019;11(9):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359996.3364242

16. Schwarz F, Fastenmeier W. Visual advisory warnings about hidden dangers: Effects of specific symbols and spatial referencing on necessary and unnecessary warnings. Appl Ergon. 2018;72:25-36. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.apergo.2018.05.001

17. Wang CH, Tsai NH, Lu JM, Wang MJ. Usability evaluation of an instructional application based on Google Glass for mobile phone disassembly tasks. Appl Ergon. 2019;77:58-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.01.007

18. Baumeister J, Ssin SY, ElSayed NAM, Dorrian J, Webb DP, Walsh JA, Simon TM, Irlitti A, Smith RT, Kohler M, Thomas BH. Cognitive Cost of Using Augmented Reality Displays. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. 2017;23(11):2378-2388. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2017.2735098

19. Thapa N, Park HJ, Yang JG, Son H, Jang M, Lee J, Kang SW, Park KW, Park H. The effect of a virtual reality-based intervention program on cognition in older adults with mild cognitive impairment: a randomized control trial. J Clin Med. 2020;9(5):1283. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9051283

20. Dużmańska N, Strojny P, Strojny A. Can simulator sickness be avoided? a review on temporal aspects of simulator sickness. Front Psychol. 2018;9:2132. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02132

21. Voytenko VP. Zdorov'e zdorovykh: Vvedenie v sanologiyu. Kiev : Zdorov'e, 1991. (In Russ.).

22. Psikhodiagnostika stressa : praktikum. Sost. RV Kupriyanov, YuM Kuz'mina. Kazan : KNITU. 2012; 212 (In Russ.).

23. Ivanov VI, Litvinova NA, Berezina MG. Avtomatizirovannyy kompleks dlya individual'noy otsenki individual'no-tipologicheskikh svoystv i funktsional'nogo sostoyaniya organizma cheloveka «STATUS PF». Journal of Health and Life Sciences. 2004;(4):70-73. (In Russ.).

24. Wascher E, Rasch B, Sänger J, Hoffmann S, Schneider D, Rinkenauer G, Heuer H, Gutberlet I. Frontal theta activity reflects distinct aspects of mental fatigue. Biol Psychol. 2014;96:57-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2013.11.010

25. Puma S, Matton N, Paubel PV, Raufaste É, El-Yagoubi R. Using theta and alpha band power to assess cognitive workload in multitasking environments. Int J Psychophysiol. 2018;123:111-120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2017.10.004.

26. Borghini G, Astolfi L, Vecchiato G, Mattia D, Babiloni F. Measuring neurophysiological signals in aircraft pilots and car drivers for the assessment of mental workload, fatigue and drowsiness. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2014;(44):58-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2012.10.003

27. Käthner I, Wriessnegger SC, Müller-Putz GR, Kübler A, Halder S. Effects of mental workload and fatigue on the P300, alpha and theta band power during operation of an ERP (P300) brain-computer interface. Biol Psychol. 2014;(102):118-129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2014.07.014