Preview Newsletter
Martin Banks Media Scan
-
Long-term effects of virtual reality use need more research, say scientists
Mar 19, 2016 | Guardian
By Nicola Davis
...Marty Banks, professor of optometry at the University of California, Berkeley, and head of the visual space perception laboratory, has looked into many aspects of virtual reality and vision. One of the biggest problems, he says, is an issue dubbed the “vergence-accommodation conflict” that can cause eye-strain - an effect also noted by Oculus Rift’s guidelines. The impact seems to be temporary, but Banks says longer-lasting effects are worth watching out for. “Everything I have seen suggests it is all short-term and you readjust after you take that headset off,” he said. “But I think it would be unwise for us to say there is no problem.”... -
Why not to fear the impact of virtual reality goggles on your long-term health
Mar 4, 2015 | Washington Post
By Matt McFarland
...“There’s no real smoking gun here,” said Martin Banks, a professor of optometry and vision science at the University of California at Berkeley. (Banks happens to be one of the authors of a research paper MagicLeap sent to me.) “But people are making these rather brash statements about potential health concerns and stuff as if there’s a smoking gun. I don’t see it. All these claims that are made, there’s not much there.”... -
The Obscure Neuroscience Problem That’s Plaguing VR
Aug 11, 2015 | Wired
By Sarah Zhang
...At SIGGRAPH in Los Angeles this week, Stanford professor Gordon Wetzstein and his colleagues are presenting a new head-mounted display that minimizes the vergence-accommodation conflict. This isn’t just some esoteric academic problem. Leading VR companies like Oculus and Microsoft know all too well their headsets are off, and Magic Leap, the super secret augmented reality company in Florida, is betting the house on finding a solution first. “It’s an exciting area of research,” says Martin Banks, a vision scientist at the University of California, Berkeley. “I think it’s going to be the next big thing in displays.”... -
Is VR too dangerous for kids? We asked the experts
Apr 23, 2016 | Digital Trends
By Simon Hill
...“There is pretty good evidence, particularly among children, that if you do so-called near work, where you’re looking at something up close, like reading a book up very close or looking at a cellphone, that it causes the eye to lengthen and that causes the eye to become near-sighted,” explains Professor Banks.... -
Tech Talk: Long-Term VR Side Effects Are Still A Big Unknown
Aug 29, 2017 | Android Headlines
By Daniel Golightly
...Meanwhile, Martin Banks, a professor of optometry and vision science at the University of California, Berkeley, sees other problems that could stem from VR in terms of physiology. More to the point, Banks points to evidence of a negative correlation between viewing displays or objects at a close distance, such as while, “reading, looking at your cell phone, playing video games on your cell phones,” and nearsightedness in children. Banks continues to point out the health risk associated with that, as nearsightedness can put some at a higher risk for retinal diseases. At the same time, research conducted at the Beijing Institute of Technology suggests VR is less harmful than other devices since it simulates viewing at a distance instead of up-close viewing from a set distance. It also suggested that VR may improve the eyesight of pre-teen users, which Banks says may be attributable to how adaptable younger people are. Banks plans to embark on further studies in partnership with Vision Science professor Jenny Read from Newcastle University, in the future. That study will involve at least 600 participants and occur over the course of a year...
Top-Tier and Regional News
Trade Media
-
Long-term effects of virtual reality use need more research, say scientists
Mar 19, 2016 | Guardian
By Nicola Davis
Virtual reality might be marching into the mainstream, but questions remain about its long-term effects, scientists say.
With a handful of virtual reality (VR) headsets on the market already, and more on their way with Sony announcing this week it will release a PlayStation set in October, the impact of such devices on eyesight, the brain and behaviour is still being established.
Current Healthy and Safety guidelines for the Oculus Rift list a host of possible side effects with warnings ranging from seizures, nausea and dizziness to - for children engaging in prolonged use - trouble with hand-eye coordination.
While many effects are believed to be temporary and leave no lasting damage, there have been few long-term studies into use of the technology.Virtual Reality Studio: sign up for our email updates
Marty Banks, professor of optometry at the University of California, Berkeley, and head of the visual space perception laboratory, has looked into many aspects of virtual reality and vision. One of the biggest problems, he says, is an issue dubbed the “vergence-accommodation conflict” that can cause eye-strain - an effect also noted by Oculus Rift’s guidelines. The impact seems to be temporary, but Banks says longer-lasting effects are worth watching out for. “Everything I have seen suggests it is all short-term and you readjust after you take that headset off,” he said. “But I think it would be unwise for us to say there is no problem.”
But Banks believes many of the more alarming side effects listed for the devices are simply down to companies playing it safe. “I have seen some where they’re really just pretty ridiculous,” he says. One company offers a warning to pregnant women considering using a VR headset. “Why would that be? They are just being really, really cautious,” he says.
Sarah Sharples, professor of human factors at the University of Nottingham and president of the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors, said much more research was needed. She said: “We haven’t really yet got to the stage where people have been using virtual reality for prolonged periods of time - over, for example, periods of weeks or months - to identify with any clear certainty any long-term effects of virtual reality.”
Yet Sharples is cautious about linking known “effects” with “problems” - the evidence, she says is simply not available. “The key point is : there are effects, but are they detrimental?”
Another area of concern is the impact of virtual reality devices on human behaviour. Albert “Skip” Rizzo, director for dedical virtual reality at the University of Southern California believes there is plenty of work to be done. “Psychology as a science has been around for 100 years studying how humans behave and interact in the real world. I think we need almost as much time now to study how humans behave and interact in the virtual world and what those implications are,” he says. But as Rizzo is keen to point out, the benefits of virtual reality systems are myriad, revealing that they have been used in a host of therapeutic situations, from helping those living with post traumatic stress disorder to those suffering from depression. “I’m one of the biggest proponents that we can do things in VR that make a positive difference for people in the real world,” he said. “But if you accept that then you have got to accept that maybe this technology could have detrimental effects that are yet to be seen. I don’t think we should be hysterical about it, I think we should have watchful caution.”
As Sharples points out, VR companies themselves are keenly involved in probing the problems. But for now, she believes, common sense should prevail. Her advice echoes that of Oculus: stop using the headset if you feel unwell, don’t use for more than 30 minutes and make sure someone is keeping an eye on you.
“Absolutely there are potentially negative effects of using VR. The most important thing that we should do is just to be cautious and sensible” she says. “But we shouldn’t let that stop us from taking advantage of the massive potential this technology offers as well.”
-
Why not to fear the impact of virtual reality goggles on your long-term health
Mar 4, 2015 | Washington Post
By Matt McFarland
Last week, Magic Leap chief executive Rony Abovitz caused a stir when he said that many virtual reality goggles can cause permanent neurological deficits.
Abovitz called out a certain type of headset called stereoscopic 3D. That happens to be the style used by his competitors, including Oculus, Microsoft and Samsung.
While answering questions on Reddit, he said that Magic Leap believes stereoscopic 3D “can cause a spectrum of temporary and/or permanent neurological deficits.” He added that “our philosophy as a company (and my personal view) is to ‘leave no footprints’ in the brain. The brain is very neuroplastic — and there is no doubt that near-eye stereoscopic 3d systems have the potential to cause neurologic change. . . . I personally experienced a number of these stereoscopic-3d issues — and would not wear these devices — especially knowing that digital light-field systems are on the way and safe.”
The mention of digital light-field systems is a reference to Magic Leap’s approach to augmented reality. The company, which received a $542 million funding round from Google, has been largely shrouded in secrecy. But we do know that its product will rely on a tiny projector that shines light in your eyes. On Reddit, Abovitz described it as a method that “respects the biology of the human eye-brain system in a profound and safe way.”
When I asked MagicLeap to clarify Abovitz’s remarks, it pointed me toward the warnings associated with the virtual reality goggles from Samsung and Oculus, plus research highlighting the symptoms that can come from wearing a 3D stereoscopic headset.
“What we’re trying to do is raise awareness of the need to have a higher level of sensitivity to the potential negative impacts that technology can have on the body within this category specifically,” Abovitz said. He also said that after using a stereoscopic 3D device for two to three hours, he experienced double vision, and loss of focus for a day.
Although it’s true that virtual reality systems can trigger a range of unwanted symptoms such as fatigue, headaches and nausea, there’s no evidence that wearing stereoscopic 3D goggles creates permanent health issues.
“There’s no real smoking gun here,” said Martin Banks, a professor of optometry and vision science at the University of California at Berkeley. (Banks happens to be one of the authors of a research paper MagicLeap sent to me.) “But people are making these rather brash statements about potential health concerns and stuff as if there’s a smoking gun. I don’t see it. All these claims that are made, there’s not much there.”
The problems associated with wearing a 3D stereoscopic headset come from one of two things: the vestibulo-ocular reflex and vergence-accommodation conflicts.
If a virtual reality headset isn’t designed well, what the wearer sees will not adjust fluidly as the viewer moves her head from side to side. This can result in those unpleasant symptoms. Some may remain for a short period immediately after the headset is removed. Activities such as driving a car aren’t safe until the symptoms disappear. But there’s no proof of any permanent neurological change.
-
The Obscure Neuroscience Problem That’s Plaguing VR
Aug 11, 2015 | Wired
By Sarah Zhang
DESPITE VIRTUAL REALITY’S recent renaissance, the technology still has some obvious problems. One, you look like a dumbass using it. Two, the stomach-churning mismatch between what you see and what you feel contributes to “virtual reality sickness.” But there’s another, less obvious flaw that could add to that off-kilter sensation: an eye-focusing problem called vergence-accommodation conflict. It’s only less obvious because, well, you rarely experience it outside of virtual reality.
At SIGGRAPH in Los Angeles this week, Stanford professor Gordon Wetzstein and his colleagues are presenting a new head-mounted display that minimizes the vergence-accommodation conflict. This isn’t just some esoteric academic problem. Leading VR companies like Oculus and Microsoft know all too well their headsets are off, and Magic Leap, the super secret augmented reality company in Florida, is betting the house on finding a solution first. “It’s an exciting area of research,” says Martin Banks, a vision scientist at the University of California, Berkeley. “I think it’s going to be the next big thing in displays.”
Okay okay, so what’s the big deal with the vergence-accommodation conflict? Two things happen when you simply “look” at an object. First, you point your eyeballs. If an object is close, your eyes naturally converge on it; if it’s far, they diverge. Hence, vergence. If your eyes don’t line up correctly, you end up seeing double.
The second thing that happens is the lenses inside your eyes focus on the object, aka accommodation. Normally, vergence and accommodation are coupled. “The visual system has developed a circuit where the two response talk to each other,” says Banks. “That makes perfect sense in the natural environment. They’re both trying to get to the same distance, so why wouldn’t they talk to one another?” In other words, your meat brain has figured out a handy shortcut for the real world.
Strap on an Oculus Rift or Samsung Gear VR, though, and all bets are off. These stereoscopic headsets create 3D images by showing the left and right eye images that are slightly offset—the more offset, the closer an object appears. That means your eyes are always accommodating to the screen strapped on your face, but they’re converging to a distance further off. Your eyes aren’t dumb; it’s totally possible to uncouple accommodation and convergence, but they won’t be happy about it. And they’ll be downright rebelling after a few hours.
In 2008, Banks and his colleagues published a paper showing that the vergence-accommodation conflict causes fatigue and discomfort. It may also contribute to virtual reality sickness. To do the research, the team had to build a device that basically solves the conflict. The device is big box—like you might see at an optometrist’s office—with three or four different planes each showing a different part of an image. A lens that can change power sits in front of the planes, bringing different parts of the image into focus. It has great color and great resolution, but it’s not coming to your living room any time soon. “We actually put people in a bite bar,” says Banks. “We have to know exactly where the eye is, so you can’t move your head.”
The head-mounted display from Wetzstein and colleagues at SIGGRAPH, on the other hand, actually fits on your head. Your eyes can move freely. Instead of flat images, the display creates light fields, or 3D patterns of light rays that mimic light bouncing off objects in the real world. The hardware consists of two stacked liquid crystal displays (LCD). An algorithm divides an image between the two LCDs, with more detail for distant objects on the rear LCD. “Where the real difference comes in is that computational step,” says Wetzstein. The entire device is made with off-the-shelf parts.
But again, don’t expect to play video games anytime soon in this display either. The field of view is limited at 90 degrees, and resolution isn’t up to Oculus standards. More planes could mean more realistic images. But it does show that a truly head-mounted display can deal with the vergence-accommodation conflict. Other groups have tried to create light fields by bending light with microlenses, but getting high resolution on those is even more difficult, says Wetzstein. Magic Leap is also doing something with light fields, but nobody’s sure exactly what.
The current crop of high-profile head-mounted displays from Oculus and Samsung rely on stereoscopic displays. They’re pretty good, but they’re likely a dead end for solving the vergence-accommodation conflict. To do that, the industry might have to start over with light fields.
-
Is VR too dangerous for kids? We asked the experts
Apr 23, 2016 | Digital Trends
By Simon Hill
For decades now, we’ve imagined a future where we can plug into a fully three-dimensional virtual world. Virtual reality opens the door to true escapism with a whole new level of immersive experience. It will let us be with people, attend events, and visit places that are physically out of reach. The educational possibilities are endless, but as excitement about the dawn of virtual reality continues to heat up, there’s one group that could be left out in the cold – children.
The majority of VR headset manufacturers are setting age limits. The Oculus Rift and Samsung’s Gear VR headset have a 13+ age rating. Sony’s PlayStation VR is not to be used by children under the age of 12. And though HTC doesn’t specify an age limit, it does warn against allowing young children to use the Vive.
Disappointed parents and frustrated children everywhere wonder why these age limits have been set. What are the risks? Is this a precautionary measure, arbitrary legalese, or is there real danger?New doesn’t mean dangerous
“So far I’ve seen no so-called smoking gun, no concrete evidence that a child of a certain age was somehow adversely affected by wearing a VR headset,” Martin Banks, Professor of Optometry, Vision Science, Psychology, and Neuroscience at the University of California, Berkeley told Digital Trends. “My guess is that all they’re doing is saying that kids are developing and development slows down when they reach adolescence, and so lets just play it safe and say that while these kids are undergoing significant development, we’ll advise people not to let them use it.”
It’s not surprising that VR headset manufacturers are being cautious. Virtual reality is relatively new, and we don’t know much about the long-term effects yet, especially on children.
“There is pretty good evidence, particularly among children, that if you do so-called near work, where you’re looking at something up close, like reading a book up very close or looking at a cellphone, that it causes the eye to lengthen and that causes the eye to become near-sighted,” explains Professor Banks.
Nearsightedness, or myopia, is where close objects appear clear, but objects far away look blurry. It has been on the increase in recent years. One study in the U.S. found that nearsightedness in those from age 12 to 54 rose from 25 percent in 1971-1972 to 41.6 percent in 1999-2004. There’s a lot of evidencelinking this trend to near work, such as reading or using a computer.
The damage occurs when a child focuses on something near for long periods of time, so it’s understandable that some may fear VR headsets will add to the problem. The screen is just two inches from the user’s eyes. But the technology is more complex than that.
“Let’s contrast a kid using a VR headset compared to a kid using a smartphone. When they use the smartphone they typically hold it very close to them and so they have to focus their eye close,” explains Prof. Banks. “You might think that with the VR headset they’d have to do the same thing because the image is close to the eye, but [VR headsets] have optics in the setup that make the stimulus effectively far away, so, in terms of where the eye has to focus, you have to actually focus fairly far away to sharpen the image in the headset.”
That means VR headsets may be less of a problem than books or smartphones. But what about other risks that may be more serious for a child’s developing eyesight?The virtual can detect real eyesight problems early
“In the real world the two eyes get slightly different views,” Professor Peter Howarth, a Senior Lecturer, optometrist and vision expert, explained to Digital Trends. “For a normal child, this gives rise to the development of the sensory capability to judge depth by using stereopsis. I can’t see that the intermittent use of a VR system by a normal child would adversely affect this.”
VR headsets are essentially mimicking the way our eyes already work by showing each eye a slightly different image, which enables us to perceive depth.
“The ability to see detail depends upon the production of a sharp image on the developing retina. Again, the intermittent use of a VR system should not adversely affect this, even if the image quality was less than perfect,” says Prof. Howarth.
VR devices can mimic the equipment used to treat Orthoptic problems, such as lazy eyes. So, there is the possibility that virtual reality headsets could help diagnose eye problems, and even treat them, rather than cause them.
“Manufacturers could build in vision tests and allow people to see that they might have a problem and should consult an eye specialist,” suggests Prof. Banks.
It remains to be seen whether any VR manufacturer will go down that road. And there is still the risk that the wrong optical hardware could exacerbate an undiagnosed problem.
Most known risks are shared with adults
“There will be issues for children that are the same as for adults, and one of these is visually-induced motion sickness (VIMS),” explains Prof. Howarth. “This comes about because the image you’re viewing gives the brain the visual signals it receives when you’re actually moving – and these can give rise to motion sickness.”
In other words, if you get sick on a roller coaster, it’s a reasonable bet that you’ll get sick on a virtual one. There are also problems when the visual images being presented by the VR headset are inconsistent.
“When you move your head and they try to update the image, so the image looks like it’s a stable part of the world. If they don’t get that right, if there’s a time lag or they don’t move the image the correct amount, people who are susceptible to motion sickness can be susceptible to nausea, headache and stuff like that with VR headsets,” explains Prof. Banks.
Nausea isn’t the only danger that rises from the separate real and virtual words. Collisions with nearby objects are a concern.
“While wearing headsets and physically moving around to navigate a virtual world, there is a danger of colliding with the real world,” Dr. Cyriel Diels, an expert in Psychology and Human Factors, explained to Digital Trends. “I can’t really see how this would differ for children except for potential health and safety issues, which may have different ramifications for children than for adults.”
In other words, an adult will probably be okay if she walks face-first into a bookshelf, but a child might not. Some headsets try to account for this problem. The HTC Vive maps your environment with sensors and will warn you when you get to close to something by having it bleed into the virtual world. But the risk remains, as the technology isn’t perfect, and kids don’t always heed warnings.
Finally, the virtual world can have a lingering impact on users after they’ve disconnected. As you use VR, your brain starts to adjust for the peculiarities of the new experience – but when you return to the real, you must adjust again.
“Some people may experience after-effects that may affect motor control (hand eye coordination, postural stability),” explains Dr. Diels. “The classic example is that soldiers may not be allowed to engage in any activities that may be affected such as driving or using certain machinery.”
Kids can use VR safely, but expect caution, anyway
It seems a shame to inflict a blanket ban on kids when there’s no real evidence that VR is any more dangerous than a book or a tablet. Fear of litigation definitely contributes to the modern obsession with health and safety and our culture is growing ever more risk-averse as we increasingly look to bundle our kids in cotton wool.
However, the lack of long term studies on the possible impact of VR headsets may make caution sensible, for the moment at least.
“My opinion is that it’s more lawyers talking than scientists talking,” says Prof. Banks. “But never say never. I’m not going to say that there’s definitely no risk, because we can’t know that.”
-
Tech Talk: Long-Term VR Side Effects Are Still A Big Unknown
Aug 29, 2017 | Android Headlines
By Daniel Golightly
There may be a lot of hype around VR technologies, but many researchers are still really undecided on the question about whether or not that’s a good thing. Although studies have been conducted for decades with a focus on the possible side effects, the most recent research suggests that more data is needed about what happens to users in the long term. The indication seems to be that VR has the potential to substantially impact a user’s psychology, brain activity, and physical well-being. That’s all because of how experiences can rewire the brain and how screen technologies can affect eyesight.
The first study, which was led by Mayank Mehta at UCLA, was conducted using a virtually-created environment and rats. The rats were set on a rotating ball using a harness – the ball acted as a kind of treadmill for the animals to “move around” – and surrounded by displays and other equipment to simulate a virtual environment not dissimilar to what users of room-scale VR will experience. The rats interacted with their environment and appeared to become fully immersed in the digital world. The experiment was interesting in and of itself, to begin with, but researchers also conducted tests to examine brain activity in the rats in the virtual environment. What they discovered is that the region of the brain which is responsible for creating “maps,” usually with informational input from all intact senses, and memories mostly shut down. In fact, in that area of the rats’ brain, 60 percent of neurons effectively shut off, while 40 percent of the mental maps created were “corrupted.” What makes the finding interesting is that particular portion of the brain – referred to as the hippocampus – has also been linked to various cognitive disorders, including Alzheimer’s, strokes, and schizophrenia. That could be a major concern for human users since there’s no way of knowing how these kinds of changes in the brain will present themselves after long-term exposure or over years of VR use.
Others, such as the USC’s director of the Medical Virtual Reality Institute for Creative Technologies Skip Rizzo, are less concerned about long-term psychological side effects. Rizzo believes the research will be useful for VR-focused companies in the eventuality of lawsuits, for starters. “Whether damages are there or not,” Rizzo says, somebody will eventually probably claim to have suffered from the use of VR. More research will show what usage guidelines VR needs to have in order to prevent long-term problems and the likely problems that could be faced if any at all. Taking things further, Rizzo believes VR will have a positive effect overall, with prolonged use because users will be “embodied” in “novel environments” and participate in activities they might not have otherwise. That means they could “learn things in VR” that may transfer positively into the real world. Furthermore, Rizzo points to enhancements in interactions between people and to the possible use of VR in treating post-traumatic stress disorder and brain injuries – primarily with regard to rehabilitation. All of the positive possibilities aside, however, he agrees that more research is certainly needed because users spending hours at a time in VR could have other effects.
Meanwhile, Martin Banks, a professor of optometry and vision science at the University of California, Berkeley, sees other problems that could stem from VR in terms of physiology. More to the point, Banks points to evidence of a negative correlation between viewing displays or objects at a close distance, such as while, “reading, looking at your cell phone, playing video games on your cell phones,” and nearsightedness in children. Banks continues to point out the health risk associated with that, as nearsightedness can put some at a higher risk for retinal diseases. At the same time, research conducted at the Beijing Institute of Technology suggests VR is less harmful than other devices since it simulates viewing at a distance instead of up-close viewing from a set distance. It also suggested that VR may improve the eyesight of pre-teen users, which Banks says may be attributable to how adaptable younger people are. Banks plans to embark on further studies in partnership with Vision Science professor Jenny Read from Newcastle University, in the future. That study will involve at least 600 participants and occur over the course of a year.
With all of that said, the results across the board are decidedly inconclusive. Further research will likely show that there are both positive and negative connotations with VR, as with nearly all emergent technologies. However, even that can’t be said with too much certainty, until that research has been completed.
Top-Tier and Regional News
Trade Media
Add recipients
Suggested