Effects of Different Visual Flow Velocities on Psychophysiological Responses During Virtual Reality Cycling.

INTRODUCTION

Virtual reality cycling (VRC) is simulated outdoor cycling with changes in scenery in virtual reality (VR) with rotating ergometer pedals. The speed at which the scenery changes, which is the visual flow velocity, can shift according to the same pedal rotation speed.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the effects of different visual flow velocities on the psychophysiological responses of cyclists using the VRC.

METHODS

Participants were asked to cycle for 20 min at 30% of their maximum exercise load under four conditions: (1) bicycle ergometer without VR (control), (2) VRC at normal visual flow velocity (VRC-normal), (3) VRC at 0.5 times the visual flow velocity of VRC-normal (VRC-slow), and (4) VRC at 1.5 times the visual flow velocity of VRC-normal (VRC-fast). The order of the four conditions was randomized in a counterbalanced design. The heart rate and rating of perceived exertion were recorded during the exercise. Participants graded their enjoyment of the task using the physical activity enjoyment scale (PACES). The measured data were analyzed by comparing the visual flow velocity conditions (VRC-slow, VRC-normal, and VRC-fast), and comparing the VRC and bicycle ergometer (VRC-normal and control).

RESULTS

A total of 24 participants were enrolled in the study. There was a significant main effect observed in the PACES score (F=20.129, p<0.001, partial η=0.467). In the post-hoc test for the PACES, significant differences were found in the following combinations: VRC-normal > VRC-slow (p=0.005); VRC-fast > VRC-normal (p=0.003); and VRC-fast > VRC-slow (p<0.001). In the modified Borg scale for lower-limb fatigue, there were significant differences in time factor (F=134.048, p<0.001, partial η=0.854) and interaction effects (F=3.156, p=0.018, partial η=0.121). In the post-hoc test for the modified Borg scale, significant trends were found in the following combinations: VRC-normal > VRC-fast (p=0.068) and VRC-slow > VRC-fast (p=0.083).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that a slower visual flow velocity may reduce the enjoyment of exercise, whereas a faster visual flow velocity may make the exercise feel less fatigued and more enjoyable.