Are Head-mounted Displays Really Not Suitable for Driving Simulation? A Comparison with a Screen-Based Simulator
DOI: 10.1109/iv55152.2023.10186592
archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified
Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)
Summary
This study investigates whether modern head-mounted displays (HMDs) are suitable for driving simulation by comparing them against a high-fidelity screen-based simulator using an LED wall. Previous literature has presented heterogeneous findings regarding the impact of HMDs on simulator sickness, sense of presence, and visual perception, often attributing negative outcomes to outdated hardware with low resolution or limited field of view (FOV). The authors aimed to clarify these ambiguities by employing Bayesian hypothesis testing to assess statistical equivalence, rather than merely testing for differences, using a state-of-the-art HMD (Varjo VR-3) to ensure a fair comparison. The research utilized a repeated-measures within-subjects design involving 31 participants who experienced both simulators in counter-balanced orders. The HMD simulator featured a seat box mockup and the Varjo VR-3, offering a 115° FOV and high resolution, while the LED wall simulator used a full vehicle mockup with a 310° FOV. Both systems were calibrated to match contrast and frame rates (60 Hz). Participants completed four scenarios: country road, highway, test track, and urban driving. Tasks assessed active and passive distance perception (e.g., blind following, egocentric estimation), speed perception (e.g., acceleration reaction, passive estimation), and active braking. Simulator sickness and presence were measured via standardized questionnaires after each scenario. The results indicated that the HMD performed equally well as the LED wall simulator across most metrics. Bayesian analysis provided moderate evidence for equivalence in active distance perception tasks (blind following and distance keeping) and active speed perception (acceleration task). Evidence for equivalence in passive speed and distance perception was weaker but still pointed toward no significant difference. The only instance of worse performance in the HMD was in the target braking task, though this finding was supported only by anecdotal evidence. Furthermore, there was moderate evidence for equivalence regarding simulator sickness and sense of presence, contradicting the hypothesis that HMDs induce higher sickness or greater presence. Simulator sickness was significantly higher in the urban scenario compared to others, regardless of display type. The study concludes that current high-fidelity HMDs do not present disadvantages for driving simulation compared to immersive LED wall systems. The lack of performance differences suggests that previous negative findings may have been driven by lower-quality hardware rather than the HMD technology itself. The authors note that binocular depth cues provided by HMDs did not enhance distance perception in the tested scenarios, likely because many tasks involved distances where such cues are less relevant. These findings support the validity of using modern HMDs in driving research, provided that hardware specifications are sufficient to minimize visual artifacts.
Provenance
The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.
| Stage | Outcome | Tool | Model | Prompt | Attempts | Completed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| discover | success | OpenAlex-citations | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-18 |
| archive | success | unpaywall | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-25 |
| extract | success | cached | — | — | 2 | 2026-06-26 |
| clean | success | clean | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-18 |
| chunk | success | chunk | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-18 |
| embed | success | embed | Qwen/Qwen3-Embedding-8B | — | 1 | 2026-06-18 |
| promote | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-18 |
| summarize | success | llm | qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant | summ-v5 | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
| tag | success | vector_similarity | — | — | 6 | 2026-06-18 |
| verify | success | — | — | — | 1 | 2026-06-26 |
Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.
Topics
Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.
Information type
What kind of knowledge this paper contributes, grouped by family — independent of topic (what it is about) and method (how it was studied).
- Methodological Resource: tool software, validation psychometrics