Immersive virtual reality (VR) emerges as a promising research and clinical tool. However, several studies suggest that VR induced adverse symptoms and effects (VRISE) may undermine the health and safety standards, and the reliability of the scientific results. In the current literature review, the technical reasons for the adverse symptomatology are investigated to provide suggestions and technological knowledge for the implementation of VR head-mounted display (HMD) systems in cognitive neuroscience. The technological systematic literature indicated features pertinent to display, sound, motion tracking, navigation, ergonomic interactions, user experience, and computer hardware that should be considered by the researchers. Subsequently, a meta-analysis of 44 neuroscientific or neuropsychological studies involving VR HMD systems was performed. The meta-analysis of the VR studies demonstrated that new generation HMDs induced significantly less VRISE and marginally fewer dropouts.Importantly, the commercial versions of the new generation HMDs with ergonomic interactions had zero incidents of adverse symptomatology and dropouts. HMDs equivalent to or greater than the commercial versions of contemporary HMDs accompanied with ergonomic interactions are suitable for implementation in cognitive neuroscience. In conclusion, researchers technological competency, along with meticulous methods and reports pertinent to software, hardware, and VRISE, are paramount to ensure the health and safety standards and the reliability of neuroscientific results.

Research suggests that the duration of a VR session modulates the presence and intensity of VRISE, but there are no suggestions regarding the appropriate maximum duration of VR sessions. The implementation of high-end VR HMDs in conjunction with ergonomic VR software seems to mitigate the presence of VRISE substantially. However, a brief tool does not currently exist to appraise and report both the quality of software features and VRISE intensity quantitatively. The VRNQ was developed to assess the quality of VR software in terms of user experience, game mechanics, in-game assistance, and VRISE. Forty participants aged between 28 and 43 years were recruited (18 gamers and 22 non-gamers) for the study. They participated in 3 different VR sessions until they felt weary or discomfort and subsequently filled in the VRNQ. Our results demonstrated that VRNQ is a valid tool for assessing VR software as it has good convergent, discriminant, and construct validity. The maximum duration of VR sessions should be between 55-70 minutes when the VR software meets or exceeds the parsimonious cut-offs of the VRNQ and the users are familiarized with the VR system. Also. the gaming experience does not seem to affect how long VR sessions should last. Also, while the quality of VR software substantially modulates the maximum duration of VR sessions, age and education do not. Finally, deeper immersion, better quality of graphics and sound, and more helpful in-game instructions and prompts were found to reduce VRISE intensity. The VRNQ facilitates the brief assessment and reporting of the quality of VR software features and/or the intensity of VRISE, while its minimum and parsimonious cut-offs may appraise the suitability of VR software. The findings of this study contribute to the establishment of rigorous VR methods that are crucial for the viability of immersive VR as a research and clinical tool.

Virtual reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMD) appear to be effective research tools, which may address the problem of ecological validity in neuropsychological testing. However, their widespread implementation is hindered by VR induced symptoms and effects (VRISE) and the lack of skills in VR software development. This study offers guidelines for the development of VR software in cognitive neuroscience and neuropsychology, by describing and discussing the stages of the development of Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL), the first neuropsychological battery in immersive VR. Techniques for evaluating cognitive functions within a realistic storyline are discussed. The utility of various assets in Unity, software development kits, and other software are described so that cognitive scientists can overcome challenges pertinent to VRISE and the quality of the VR software. In addition, this pilot study attempts to evaluate VR-EAL in accordance with the necessary criteria for VR software for research purposes. The VR neuroscience questionnaire (VRNQ; Kourtesis et al., 2019b) was implemented to appraise the quality of the three versions of VR-EAL in terms of user experience, game mechanics, in-game assistance, and VRISE. Twenty-five participants aged between 20 and 45 years with 12-16 years of full-time education evaluated various versions of VR-EAL. The final version of VR-EAL achieved high scores in every sub-score of the VRNQ and exceeded its parsimonious cut-offs. It also appeared to have better in-game assistance and game mechanics, while its improved graphics substantially increased the quality of the user experience and almost eradicated VRISE. The results substantially support the feasibility of the development of effective VR research and clinical software without the presence of VRISE during a 60-minute VR session.