# Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse

Yogesh K. Dwivedi, N. Kshetri, L. Hughes, Nripendra P. Rana, A.M. Baabdullah, A.K. Kar, A. Koohang, S. Ribeiro-Navarrete, N. Belei, J. Balakrishnan, et al.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Yogesh K. Dwivedi, N. Kshetri, L. Hughes, Nripendra P. Rana, A.M. Baabdullah, et al. Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse. Information Systems Frontiers, 2023, 25 (5), pp.2071-2114. 10.1007/s10796-023-10400-x. hal-04292609

HAL Id: hal-04292609

https://hal.science/hal-04292609

Submitted on 30 May 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
# Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse

Yogesh K. Dwivedi, N. Kshetri, L. Hughes, Nripendra P. Rana, A.M. Baabdullah, A.K. Kar, A. Koohang, S. Ribeiro-Navarrete, N. Belei, J. Balakrishnan, et al.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Yogesh K. Dwivedi, N. Kshetri, L. Hughes, Nripendra P. Rana, A.M. Baabdullah, et al. Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse. Information Systems Frontiers, 2023, 25 (5), pp.2071-2114. 10.1007/s10796-023-10400-x. hal-04292609

HAL Id: hal-04292609

https://hal.science/hal-04292609v1

Submitted on 30 May 2024

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
# Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse

Yogesh K. Dwivedi¹,² ID · Nir Kshetri³ · Laurie Hughes¹ · Nripendra P. Rana⁴ · Abdullah M. Baabdullah⁵ ·

Arpan Kumar Kar⁶,⁷ · Alex Koohang⁸ · Samuel Ribeiro-Navarrete⁹,¹⁰ · Nina Belei¹¹ · Janarthanan Balakrishnan¹² ·

Sriparna Basu¹³ · Abhishek Behl¹⁴ · Gareth H. Davies¹⁵ · Vincent Dutot¹⁶ · Rohita Dwivedi¹⁷ · Leighton Evans¹⁸ ·

Reto Felix¹⁹ · Richard Foster-Fletcher²⁰ · Mihalis Giannakis²¹ ID · Ashish Gupta²² · Chris Hinsch²³ · Animesh Jain²⁴ ·

Nina Jane Patel²⁵ · Timothy Jung²⁶,²⁷ · Satinder Juneja²⁸ · Qeis Kamran²⁹,³⁰ ID · Sanjar Mohamed AB³¹ ·

Neeraj Pandey³² · Savvas Papagiannidis³³ · Ramakrishnan Raman³⁴ · Philipp A. Rauschnabel³⁵ · Preeti Tak²² ·

Alexandra Taylor³⁶ · M. Claudia tom Dieck³⁶ · Giampaolo Viglia³⁷,³⁸ · Yichuan Wang³⁹ · Meiyi Yan⁴⁰

Accepted: 4 May 2023 / Published online: 2 June 2023
© The Author(s) 2023

## Abstract

The Metaverse has the potential to form the next pervasive computing prototype that can transform many aspects of work and life at a societal level. Despite the many forecasted benefits from the metaverse, its negative outcomes have remained relatively unexplored with the majority of views grounded on logical thoughts derived from prior data points linked with similar technologies, somewhat lacking academic and expert perspective. This study responds to the dark side perspectives through informed and multifaceted narratives provided by invited leading academics and experts from diverse disciplinary backgrounds. The metaverse dark side perspectives covered include: technological and consumer vulnerability, privacy, and diminished reality, human-computer interface, identity theft, invasive advertising, misinformation, propaganda, phishing, financial crimes, terrorist activities, abuse, pornography, social inclusion, mental health, sexual harassment and metaverse-triggered unintended consequences. The paper concludes with a synthesis of common themes, formulating propositions, and presenting implications for practice and policy.

**Keywords** Dark side of the metaverse · Metaverse · Negative consequences · Second life · Unintended consequences · Virtual reality · Virtual world

## 1 Introduction

A decade ago, the metaverse was within the realms of science fiction, and has become a reality via the advancement of technology (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). The metaverse has been synonymously used to depict the future state of the internet and a new and immersive user experience and engagement

(Dwivedi et al., 2023a). The metaverse is a simulated environment that is developed to converge an enhanced version of physical and virtual realities (Ball, 2022; Dwivedi et al., 2022a, a). The adoption of the metaverse could be significant across various verticals such as gaming, social platforms, and commerce (Wiederhold, 2022a, b). Amidst various benefits and experiences expected from the metaverse, its negative consequences remain relatively unknown (Dwivedi et al., 2022a).

The metaverse is built by integrating various technologies such as virtual reality, augmented reality, 3D modelling, animation, cloud computing, blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI), and next-generation internet applications (Dwivedi et al., 2022a, a). While previous research has asserted that these technologies may impact human life in many ways, there exists a lack of debate on the negative aspects of these technologies within the context of an immersive metaverse.

Janarthanan Balakrishnan, Sriparna Basu, Abhishek Behl, Gareth H. Davies, Vincent Dutot, Rohita Dwivedi, Leighton Evans, Reto Felix, Richard Foster-Fletcher, Mihalis Giannakis, Ashish Gupta, Chris Hinsch, Animesh Jain, Nina Jane Patel, Timothy Jung, Satinder Juneja, Qeis Kamran, Sanjar Mohamed AB, Neeraj Pandey, Savvas Papagiannidis, Ramakrishnan Raman, Philipp A. Rauschnabel, Preeti Tak, Alexandra Taylor, M. Claudia tom Dieck, Giampaolo Viglia, Yichuan Wang, Meiyi Yan have made equal contributions and are placed in alphabetical order.
# Exploring the Darkverse: A Multi-Perspective Analysis of the Negative Societal Impacts of the Metaverse

Yogesh K. Dwivedi¹,² ID · Nir Kshetri³ · Laurie Hughes¹ · Nripendra P. Rana⁴ · Abdullah M. Baabdullah⁵ ·

Arpan Kumar Kar⁶,⁷ · Alex Koohang⁸ · Samuel Ribeiro-Navarrete⁹,¹⁰ · Nina Belei¹¹ · Janarthanan Balakrishnan¹² ·

Sriparna Basu¹³ · Abhishek Behl¹⁴ · Gareth H. Davies¹⁵ · Vincent Dutot¹⁶ · Rohita Dwivedi¹⁷ · Leighton Evans¹⁸ ·

Reto Felix¹⁹ · Richard Foster-Fletcher²⁰ · Mihalis Giannakis²¹ ID · Ashish Gupta²² · Chris Hinsch²³ · Animesh Jain²⁴ ·

Nina Jane Patel²⁵ · Timothy Jung²⁶,²⁷ · Satinder Juneja²⁸ · Qeis Kamran²⁹,³⁰ ID · Sanjar Mohamed AB³¹ ·

Neeraj Pandey³² · Savvas Papagiannidis³³ · Ramakrishnan Raman³⁴ · Philipp A. Rauschnabel³⁵ · Preeti Tak²² ·

Alexandra Taylor³⁶ · M. Claudia tom Dieck³⁶ · Giampaolo Viglia³⁷,³⁸ · Yichuan Wang³⁹ · Meiyi Yan⁴⁰

Accepted: 4 May 2023 / Published online: 2 June 2023
© The Author(s) 2023

## Abstract

The Metaverse has the potential to form the next pervasive computing prototype that can transform many aspects of work and life at a societal level. Despite the many forecasted benefits from the metaverse, its negative outcomes have remained relatively unexplored with the majority of views grounded on logical thoughts derived from prior data points linked with similar technologies, somewhat lacking academic and expert perspective. This study responds to the dark side perspectives through informed and multifaceted narratives provided by invited leading academics and experts from diverse disciplinary backgrounds. The metaverse dark side perspectives covered include: technological and consumer vulnerability, privacy, and diminished reality, human–computer interface, identity theft, invasive advertising, misinformation, propaganda, phishing, financial crimes, terrorist activities, abuse, pornography, social inclusion, mental health, sexual harassment and metaverse-triggered unintended consequences. The paper concludes with a synthesis of common themes, formulating propositions, and presenting implications for practice and policy.

**Keywords** Dark side of the metaverse · Metaverse · Negative consequences · Second life · Unintended consequences · Virtual reality · Virtual world

## 1 Introduction

A decade ago, the metaverse was within the realms of science fiction, and has become a reality via the advancement of technology (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). The metaverse has been synonymously used to depict the future state of the internet and a new and immersive user experience and engagement

(Dwivedi et al., 2023a). The metaverse is a simulated environment that is developed to converge an enhanced version of physical and virtual realities (Ball, 2022; Dwivedi et al., 2022a, a). The adoption of the metaverse could be significant across various verticals such as gaming, social platforms, and commerce (Wiederhold, 2022a, b). Amidst various benefits and experiences expected from the metaverse, its negative consequences remain relatively unknown (Dwivedi et al., 2022a).

The metaverse is built by integrating various technologies such as virtual reality, augmented reality, 3D modelling, animation, cloud computing, blockchain, artificial intelligence (AI), and next-generation internet applications (Dwivedi et al., 2022a, a). While previous research has asserted that these technologies may impact human life in many ways, there exists a lack of debate on the negative aspects of these technologies within the context of an immersive metaverse.

Janarthanan Balakrishnan, Sriparna Basu, Abhishek Behl, Gareth H. Davies, Vincent Dutot, Rohita Dwivedi, Leighton Evans, Reto Felix, Richard Foster-Fletcher, Mihalis Giannakis, Ashish Gupta, Chris Hinsch, Animesh Jain, Nina Jane Patel, Timothy Jung, Satinder Juneja, Qeis Kamran, Sanjar Mohamed AB, Neeraj Pandey, Savvas Papagiannidis, Ramakrishnan Raman, Philipp A. Rauschnabel, Preeti Tak, Alexandra Taylor, M. Claudia tom Dieck, Giampaolo Viglia, Yichuan Wang, Meiyi Yan have made equal contributions and are placed in alphabetical order.
Given that these technologies are now integrated with a single domain, what are the negative consequences for users and the wider population? This question is yet to be explored comprehensively. Unlike most technological advancements, the metaverse has the potential to augment and even replace the physical interaction with an immersive virtual experience. There is the possibility that the metaverse can broadly experience a range of threats in the areas of privacy, ethical, legal, social, and personal security. The literature on the metaverse is increasing, however, many studies seem somewhat preoccupied with a positive metaverse narrative, perhaps ignoring the negative impacts of widespread adoption (Belk et al., 2022), highlighting a need to provide a holistic understanding of the dark sides that can exist in the metaverse.

The metaverse is created and operated via the integration of several technologies categorised at peripheral and functional levels and previous research has identified the limitations of these technologies at an individual level. Tian et al. (2018) explained that prolonged usage of extended reality (XR) or wearable devices would affect the user's health. Other studies have highlighted that AI-based simulated environments can gradually affect the cognitive processing skills of the users (Dwivedi et al., 2021b). Dwivedi et al. (2023b) highlight that data ownership in the blockchain can be a threat depending upon the network. Hashizume et al. (2013) described the security issues that can be present in the cloud computing system. Weingartner (2021) explains the social inequalities that may be present in the next generation of the internet. Dwivedi et al. (2021a) highlight the lack of privacy and social security on social networking sites. The metaverse can emerge as a consolidated platform by combining these technologies within a defined ecosystem. But can developers and brands that create the metaverse to address each technology's threat, or will it be compromised for the experience and benefits it can provide?

Although academic researchers have yet to fully explore the dark side of the metaverse, recognised sources and technology experts have started providing their perspectives (Analyticsinsight.net, 2022; Forbes, 2022; PewResearchCenter, 2022). Most views are grounded with logical thoughts deriving from historical data points associated with similar technologies. The discussion on the dark side of the metaverse can be seen from two viewpoints: technology and user perspectives. From the technology side, the technical design and functionalities can be the source of many user-related issues and user behaviour may vary, resulting in negative consequences within the metaverse. Although there is evidence of the circumstances in which metaverse gamers have encountered abuse and racism (IndiaTimes, 2022), most experts predict that the metaverse can lead to a different world with no doctrines or legal commitment entitled to the users (PewResearchCenter, 2022). Apart from the

consequences of technology impacting the metaverse, users can create a separate identity with minimal legal or ethical consequences. These behaviours can subsequently build an unsafe environment for other users. Despite the hype and positive narrative on the growth potential of the metaverse, it is critical that decision makers do not ignore the detrimental consequences to users and wider society. Some vulnerable users may find it hard to differentiate between reality and the virtual world where the trauma and abuse suffered in metaverse worlds could cause real physical harm and negative consequences. There are many questions that need answers which will allow future research on the metaverse to orient their perspectives to benefit all stakeholders of the metaverse.

This study addresses the gaps in research on the metaverse dark side from a holistic perspective by inviting and collating the contributions from a number of experts in this area. The implications of this paper will benefit academia and practice by framing appropriate measures to first identify and then offer solutions to the many negative aspects of the metaverse. This study addresses the numerous challenges and difficulties in the metaverse, including mental health and well-being, ethical and moral issues, privacy and security, and diminished reality. This research work follows the approach of von Foerster (2003) to consolidate the perspectives and structure them to arrive at a holistic meaning. The implications of this research have yielded an understanding of the explored and unexplored areas in the dark side of the metaverse, which has allowed us to list future research avenues in this area.

The remaining sections are presented in the following sequence: Section 2 includes the contributions provided by the experts. The contributions individually are brief but exhaustive in explanation. Based on the understanding derived from Section 2, Section 3 discusses and highlights prospective future directions. Consolidating from contributions, Section 4 provides the concluding remarks.

## 2 Multiple Perspectives from Leading Marketing Experts

In line with an approach originally proposed by von Foerster (2003) and subsequent multiple perspectives-based studies (Dwivedi et al., 2015, 2020, 2021a, b, 2022a, b, c, 2023a, c), we explore a number of diverse perspectives on the dark side of the metaverse. The individual contributions provided by the experts, is based on their own perspectives on the negative aspects of the metaverse and unintended consequences from its deployment, adoption, and widespread use. Table 1 presents the full list of experts and title of their contributors.

The 14 expert perspectives presented in the remaining part of this section are presented largely in unabridged form.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>
Given that these technologies are now integrated with a single domain, what are the negative consequences for users and the wider population? This question is yet to be explored comprehensively. Unlike most technological advancements, the metaverse has the potential to augment and even replace the physical interaction with an immersive virtual experience. There is the possibility that the metaverse can broadly experience a range of threats in the areas of privacy, ethical, legal, social, and personal security. The literature on the metaverse is increasing, however, many studies seem somewhat preoccupied with a positive metaverse narrative, perhaps ignoring the negative impacts of widespread adoption (Belk et al., 2022), highlighting a need to provide a holistic understanding of the dark sides that can exist in the metaverse.

The metaverse is created and operated via the integration of several technologies categorised at peripheral and functional levels and previous research has identified the limitations of these technologies at an individual level. Tian et al. (2018) explained that prolonged usage of extended reality (XR) or wearable devices would affect the user's health. Other studies have highlighted that AI-based simulated environments can gradually affect the cognitive processing skills of the users (Dwivedi et al., 2021b). Dwivedi et al. (2023b) highlight that data ownership in the blockchain can be a threat depending upon the network. Hashizume et al. (2013) described the security issues that can be present in the cloud computing system. Weingartner (2021) explains the social inequalities that may be present in the next generation of the internet. Dwivedi et al. (2021a) highlight the lack of privacy and social security on social networking sites. The metaverse can emerge as a consolidated platform by combining these technologies within a defined ecosystem. But can developers and brands that create the metaverse to address each technology's threat, or will it be compromised for the experience and benefits it can provide?

Although academic researchers have yet to fully explore the dark side of the metaverse, recognised sources and technology experts have started providing their perspectives (Analyticsinsight.net, 2022; Forbes, 2022; PewResearchCenter, 2022). Most views are grounded with logical thoughts deriving from historical data points associated with similar technologies. The discussion on the dark side of the metaverse can be seen from two viewpoints: technology and user perspectives. From the technology side, the technical design and functionalities can be the source of many user-related issues and user behaviour may vary, resulting in negative consequences within the metaverse. Although there is evidence of the circumstances in which metaverse gamers have encountered abuse and racism (IndiaTimes, 2022), most experts predict that the metaverse can lead to a different world with no doctrines or legal commitment entitled to the users (PewResearchCenter, 2022). Apart from the

consequences of technology impacting the metaverse, users can create a separate identity with minimal legal or ethical consequences. These behaviours can subsequently build an unsafe environment for other users. Despite the hype and positive narrative on the growth potential of the metaverse, it is critical that decision makers do not ignore the detrimental consequences to users and wider society. Some vulnerable users may find it hard to differentiate between reality and the virtual world where the trauma and abuse suffered in metaverse worlds could cause real physical harm and negative consequences. There are many questions that need answers which will allow future research on the metaverse to orient their perspectives to benefit all stakeholders of the metaverse.

This study addresses the gaps in research on the metaverse dark side from a holistic perspective by inviting and collating the contributions from a number of experts in this area. The implications of this paper will benefit academia and practice by framing appropriate measures to first identify and then offer solutions to the many negative aspects of the metaverse. This study addresses the numerous challenges and difficulties in the metaverse, including mental health and well-being, ethical and moral issues, privacy and security, and diminished reality. This research work follows the approach of von Foerster (2003) to consolidate the perspectives and structure them to arrive at a holistic meaning. The implications of this research have yielded an understanding of the explored and unexplored areas in the dark side of the metaverse, which has allowed us to list future research avenues in this area.

The remaining sections are presented in the following sequence: Section 2 includes the contributions provided by the experts. The contributions individually are brief but exhaustive in explanation. Based on the understanding derived from Section 2, Section 3 discusses and highlights prospective future directions. Consolidating from contributions, Section 4 provides the concluding remarks.

## 2 Multiple Perspectives from Leading Marketing Experts

In line with an approach originally proposed by von Foerster (2003) and subsequent multiple perspectives-based studies (Dwivedi et al., 2015, 2020, 2021a, b, 2022a, b, c, 2023a, c), we explore a number of diverse perspectives on the dark side of the metaverse. The individual contributions provided by the experts, is based on their own perspectives on the negative aspects of the metaverse and unintended consequences from its deployment, adoption, and widespread use. Table 1 presents the full list of experts and title of their contributors.

The 14 expert perspectives presented in the remaining part of this section are presented largely in unabridged form.

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>
<table><caption>**Table 1** Individual contributions</caption><thead><tr><td>Contribution Title</td><td>Author(s)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Contribution 2.1: Darkverse: Exploring the challenges and difficulties in metaverse</td><td>Janarthanan Balakrishnan, Rohita Dwivedi and Sriparna Basu</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.2: Metaverse- a space of known-knowns and known-unknowns</td><td>Qeis Kamran</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.3: Is it time to be all in on the Metaverse?</td><td>Giampaolo Viglia</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.4: Critical Perspectives on the Metaverse: True Value, Privacy, and Diminished Reality</td><td>Philipp Rauschnabel, Reto Felix and Chris Hinsch</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.5: Human – Computer Interface in Metaverse: Perspectives from Dark Side</td><td>Satinder Juneja, Preeti Tak & Ashish Gupta</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.6: A study of the potential dark sides of the metaverse in order to make immersive experiences more secure</td><td>Sanjar Mohamed AB</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.7: The Impact of Metaverses on Social Inclusion and Wellbeing</td><td>Savvas Papagiannidis</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.8: Darkside of Metaverse: Mental Health and Wellbeing Perspective</td><td>Alexandra Taylor, M. Claudia tom Dieck, and Timothy Jung</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.9: Sexual Harassment in the metaverse: Will Extended Reality exacerbate toxicity online?</td><td>Animesh Jain & Richard Foster-Fletcher</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.10: Mitigation Strategies of Metaverse-tripped Unintended Consequences</td><td>Yichuan Wang & Meiyi Yan</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.11: Scoping the future of Dark Side of Metaverse – A Thematic Overview</td><td>Abhishek Behl, Gareth H. Davies and Vincent Dutot</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.12: Murky side of metaverse: Implications and research questions</td><td>Neeraj Pandey, Mihalis Giannakis & Ramakrishnan Raman</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.13: The darkside of the metaverse today</td><td>Leighton Evans</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.14: Children, Young People and the Metaverse</td><td>Nina Jane Patel</td></tr></tbody></table>

The inherent unevenness with this approach is countered by capturing the unique perspectives from each of the experts as they focus on key aspects of dark side of the metaverse (Dwivedi et al., 2022a, b, c, 2023a, c).

## 2.1 Darkverse: Exploring the challenges and difficulties in metaverse—Janarthanan Balakrishnan, Rohita Dwivedi and Sriparna Basu

The metaverse has the potential to bring dreams to reality. From volcanoes to the sea, the metaverse can bring anything to reality with the help of the right tools and technology (Dwivedi et al., 2023a). Despite the benefits and virtualism that the metaverse can offer, there exists another perhaps more negative side to the metaverse. Although multiple viewpoints have articulated a positive narrative on the metaverse, at best, most are still individual perspectives. As is the case with many other technological advancements, the metaverse does have many limitations. However, compared to other immersive and interactive technologies, the metaverse can have substantial adverse consequences if not appropriately managed and controlled via effective governance (Xi et al., 2022). The darkverse is a recent term used to explain the organised crime that can take place within the virtual space (Analyticsinsight.net, 2022). We explain and extend the darkverse as a terminology that denotes the

disadvantages of the metaverse. Most of the news articles discuss darkverse as a separate platform which can be used for online crime, without realising that darkverse can be present within the ecosystem of the metaverse in many ways. Of the negative effects present in the metaverse, some can be minimised by rigorous and timely intervention or policy directions, whereas the other effects may become exponentially more prominent as the penetration of the metaverse increases. The remaining sections of 2.1 discusses the adverse effects of the metaverse.

Figure 1 explains the five major consequences (themes) of the metaverse namely; psychological impacts, physiological impacts, security concerns, moral issues, and legal issues. These five factors were derived from the academic and practice-based literature. The issues mentioned in the intersection of two themes denotes consequences that arise in connection with the metaverse. For example: The topics meta exploitation, addiction, and traumatic effects can be a part of both security concerns and psychological impacts in varying contexts. The figure also explains five integrated security issues namely; emotional security, health security, personal security, cultural security, and social security which are holistically derived based on the major themes and their intersecting consequences. For example: social security is an intersectional derivation from the angle of psychological impacts, security concerns, and moral issues. Thus, the circles overall show the major themes and their
<table><caption>**Table 1** Individual contributions</caption><thead><tr><td>Contribution Title</td><td>Author(s)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Contribution 2.1: Darkverse: Exploring the challenges and difficulties in metaverse</td><td>Janarthanan Balakrishnan, Rohita Dwivedi and Sriparna Basu</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.2: Metaverse- a space of known-knowns and known-unknowns</td><td>Qeis Kamran</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.3: Is it time to be all in on the Metaverse?</td><td>Giampaolo Viglia</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.4: Critical Perspectives on the Metaverse: True Value, Privacy, and Diminished Reality</td><td>Philipp Rauschnabel, Reto Felix and Chris Hinsch</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.5: Human – Computer Interface in Metaverse: Perspectives from Dark Side</td><td>Satinder Juneja, Preeti Tak & Ashish Gupta</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.6: A study of the potential dark sides of the metaverse in order to make immersive experiences more secure</td><td>Sanjar Mohamed AB</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.7: The Impact of Metaverses on Social Inclusion and Wellbeing</td><td>Savvas Papagiannidis</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.8: Darkside of Metaverse: Mental Health and Wellbeing Perspective</td><td>Alexandra Taylor, M. Claudia tom Dieck, and Timothy Jung</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.9: Sexual Harassment in the metaverse: Will Extended Reality exacerbate toxicity online?</td><td>Animesh Jain & Richard Foster-Fletcher</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.10: Mitigation Strategies of Metaverse-tripped Unintended Consequences</td><td>Yichuan Wang & Meiyi Yan</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.11: Scoping the future of Dark Side of Metaverse – A Thematic Overview</td><td>Abhishek Behl, Gareth H. Davies and Vincent Dutot</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.12: Murky side of metaverse: Implications and research questions</td><td>Neeraj Pandey, Mihalis Giannakis & Ramakrishnan Raman</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.13: The darkside of the metaverse today</td><td>Leighton Evans</td></tr><tr><td>Contribution 2.14: Children, Young People and the Metaverse</td><td>Nina Jane Patel</td></tr></tbody></table>

The inherent unevenness with this approach is countered by capturing the unique perspectives from each of the experts as they focus on key aspects of dark side of the metaverse (Dwivedi et al., 2022a, b, c, 2023a, c).

## 2.1 Darkverse: Exploring the challenges and difficulties in metaverse—Janarthanan Balakrishnan, Rohita Dwivedi and Sriparna Basu

The metaverse has the potential to bring dreams to reality. From volcanoes to the sea, the metaverse can bring anything to reality with the help of the right tools and technology (Dwivedi et al., 2023a). Despite the benefits and virtualism that the metaverse can offer, there exists another perhaps more negative side to the metaverse. Although multiple viewpoints have articulated a positive narrative on the metaverse, at best, most are still individual perspectives. As is the case with many other technological advancements, the metaverse does have many limitations. However, compared to other immersive and interactive technologies, the metaverse can have substantial adverse consequences if not appropriately managed and controlled via effective governance (Xi et al., 2022). The darkverse is a recent term used to explain the organised crime that can take place within the virtual space (Analyticsinsight.net, 2022). We explain and extend the darkverse as a terminology that denotes the

disadvantages of the metaverse. Most of the news articles discuss darkverse as a separate platform which can be used for online crime, without realising that darkverse can be present within the ecosystem of the metaverse in many ways. Of the negative effects present in the metaverse, some can be minimised by rigorous and timely intervention or policy directions, whereas the other effects may become exponentially more prominent as the penetration of the metaverse increases. The remaining sections of 2.1 discusses the adverse effects of the metaverse.

Figure 1 explains the five major consequences (themes) of the metaverse namely; psychological impacts, physiological impacts, security concerns, moral issues, and legal issues. These five factors were derived from the academic and practice-based literature. The issues mentioned in the intersection of two themes denotes consequences that arise in connection with the metaverse. For example: The topics meta exploitation, addiction, and traumatic effects can be a part of both security concerns and psychological impacts in varying contexts. The figure also explains five integrated security issues namely; emotional security, health security, personal security, cultural security, and social security which are holistically derived based on the major themes and their intersecting consequences. For example: social security is an intersectional derivation from the angle of psychological impacts, security concerns, and moral issues. Thus, the circles overall show the major themes and their
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** A holistic model of the Darkverse</figcaption></figure>

interactive elements that can consequentially affect the users of the metaverse. These consequences can be addressed and explored in future studies with the use of holistic or specific theoretical setup, as given in the outer layer of the figures. These theories can be used in research to investigate these variables proposed inside the figure in detail.

### 2.1.1 Psychological and Physiological Impacts

Human psychology is conditioned to the physical entity and its operational boundaries. During the last decade, extended reality devices have given humans a taste of a virtual entity. Research in cyberpsychology has explained that humans harvest pleasure and experience from virtual space at the cost of physical and mental health. In the metaverse, the benefits and flow of experience that users derive, can result in a psychological and physiological costs (Usmani et al., 2022a, b). XR devices have been proven to affect human health in areas such as vision and addiction (Rauschnabel et al., 2022b). Regular usage of the metaverse can create blurred consciousness between reality and virtuality (Dwivedi et al., 2023a) and research that has investigated virtual gaming has explained similar effects. In the long run, these effects can generate stress and build more psychological and physiological discomfort. Forbes (2022) states that the metaverse poses significant long term mental health risks for users. CNBC (2022b) highlights that the metaverse can be more addictive and, if unprotected, may create a traumatic experience

for vulnerable users. The study asserts that children could get more addicted to the metaverse, highlighting whether the metaverse can promise health and emotional security for users. Although it is too soon to ask these questions, users adopting similar technologies using XR have suffered similar consequences. The success of the metaverse is hugely dependent upon its users' psychological and physiological wellbeing. Future research can employ psychology and health theories to investigate the consequences of the metaverse and subsequent impact on users.

### 2.1.2 Moral and Legal Issues

The regulatory mechanism of the metaverse is yet to be formulated or investigated (Kostenko et al., 2022). There is a necessity that the law in the metaverse needs well-defined regulations to enable legal and moral behaviour within the virtual space (BFSI Economic Times, 2022). There are incidents of cyberbullying, flirting, harassment, and racism in virtual games reported before; though the incidents seem more virtual, the trauma and effects are near to reality (Theguardian.com, 2022). Thus, there is an extended possibility that issues related to identity theft, gambling, and unethical behaviours can increase in the metaverse. Compared to psychological and physiological threats, legal threats are more likely to be within the control of the government and companies to create a more favourable ecosystem. Moreover, it is a question whether the metaverse can promise cultural

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1** A holistic model of the Darkverse</figcaption></figure>

interactive elements that can consequentially affect the users of the metaverse. These consequences can be addressed and explored in future studies with the use of holistic or specific theoretical setup, as given in the outer layer of the figures. These theories can be used in research to investigate these variables proposed inside the figure in detail.

### 2.1.1 Psychological and Physiological Impacts

Human psychology is conditioned to the physical entity and its operational boundaries. During the last decade, extended reality devices have given humans a taste of a virtual entity. Research in cyberpsychology has explained that humans harvest pleasure and experience from virtual space at the cost of physical and mental health. In the metaverse, the benefits and flow of experience that users derive, can result in a psychological and physiological costs (Usmani et al., 2022a, b). XR devices have been proven to affect human health in areas such as vision and addiction (Rauschnabel et al., 2022b). Regular usage of the metaverse can create blurred consciousness between reality and virtuality (Dwivedi et al., 2023a) and research that has investigated virtual gaming has explained similar effects. In the long run, these effects can generate stress and build more psychological and physiological discomfort. Forbes (2022) states that the metaverse poses significant long term mental health risks for users. CNBC (2022b) highlights that the metaverse can be more addictive and, if unprotected, may create a traumatic experience

for vulnerable users. The study asserts that children could get more addicted to the metaverse, highlighting whether the metaverse can promise health and emotional security for users. Although it is too soon to ask these questions, users adopting similar technologies using XR have suffered similar consequences. The success of the metaverse is hugely dependent upon its users' psychological and physiological wellbeing. Future research can employ psychology and health theories to investigate the consequences of the metaverse and subsequent impact on users.

### 2.1.2 Moral and Legal Issues

The regulatory mechanism of the metaverse is yet to be formulated or investigated (Kostenko et al., 2022). There is a necessity that the law in the metaverse needs well-defined regulations to enable legal and moral behaviour within the virtual space (BFSI Economic Times, 2022). There are incidents of cyberbullying, flirting, harassment, and racism in virtual games reported before; though the incidents seem more virtual, the trauma and effects are near to reality (Theguardian.com, 2022). Thus, there is an extended possibility that issues related to identity theft, gambling, and unethical behaviours can increase in the metaverse. Compared to psychological and physiological threats, legal threats are more likely to be within the control of the government and companies to create a more favourable ecosystem. Moreover, it is a question whether the metaverse can promise cultural

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /></figure>
and personal security. The moral and legal issues underlying
the metaverse can potentially harm the global cultural and
ethical ecosystem. Policy makers should be able to build a
global legal ecosystem keeping the cultural, ethnic and user
profiles in mind. Also, future research in the metaverse can
employ consequentialist and regulatory theories to investi-
gate these issues.

2.1.3 Security Issues

Since the inception of cyber transactions, security is always a
more significant concern in virtual space (Gale et al., 2022).
Security concerns are inevitably present in any advanced
technology applications. Compared to other technologies, the
metaverse offers more user behavioural tracking avenues to
developers and marketers, such as: eye-tracking, pupil move-
ments, geometric movements, physical movements, and so on
(Techtarget, 2022). Security can be breached when the data is
not used for the users' benefit but for the third party's benefit.
Such a scenario is more likely in the case of the metaverse,
where multiple tracking parameters and a free world environ-
ment can question the presence of privacy and data security.
Moreover, the security issues can accelerate psychological
and moral issues. For example: Given the question of per-
sonal security, meta bullying (PewResearchCenter, 2022) can
be prominently present in the metaverse. Incidents of meta bul-
lying can create traumatic experiences for users and also dam-
age the moral significance within the metaverse ecosystem. An
integrative operational ecosystem could benefit the metaverse.
A centralised information flow using blockchains could be
developed (Ali et al., 2023), enabling rigorous identity markers
integrated with citizenship identities, and authorising digital
currencies. The introductory stages of the metaverse are likely
to be more challenging as governance controls are established
and become stabilised over time. Users of the metaverse should
be fully informed of the negative aspects within the virtual
world. Future research can employ cultural and human-inter-
action theories to investigate user privacy expectations.

## 2.2 Metaverse- a Space of Known-Knowns and Known-Unknowns—Qeis Kamran

The Metaverse as an emerging space of reality is still in the
process of construction and evolution. While much research
needs to be done to understand the risks and the dark side
pertaining to the metaverse some observed dimensions are
briefly treated here.

2.2.1 Collection and Processing of Biometric Data

The evolution of the metaverse has pushed the dimension
of access to the users’ personal data to a new level. Captur-
ing the biometric data in addition to eye tracking, capturing

users' emotional behavior and access to observation of the
gait patterns of individuals, will enable contemporary tech
giants as Meta (formerly known as Facebook), in addition to
the other gaming platforms as Decentraland, Roblox, Sand-
box,Fortnight etc., collecting all forms of data, thus enhanc-
ing their unprecedented power dynamics over their users. This
information is gained in addition to the financial data and
playing patterns of the individuals with access to larger net-
work of contacts of the users and the themes of their dis-
cussions in their chatrooms. This large concentration of the
users' metadata with algorithmic machine learning powers
would push the asymmetry of power to a much higher level
of concentration as we have so far known, thus increasing
the notion of surveillance capitalism beyond control and
products of behavior futures designed to much enhance the
addictive powers in terms of economics of attention and
marketing of personal data to an ecosystem of data hungry
tech firms.

2.2.2 Metaverse Service Providers are Completely
Centralized

The terms of services rendered in the Metaverse are so far
completely centralized and largely controlled by the firms
operating the individual giant platforms. While, via the pos-
sibility of interoperability, control that could be reintroduced
to the users in terms of choice of play, individual invest-
ments, doing business, ownership of land and digital assets
and marketing, is still much in the far horizon. Hence each
platform would first try to limit the notion of interoperability
and thus increase switching costs so that more business is
done within their own domains.

Furthermore, metaverse platforms have the power to expose
their users to any kind of known and unknown challenges
based on the possible risks of cyberattacks to their platforms,
or to the partners in their greater ecosystem and value chains.
The breach of such data could expose many users to a much
higher level of risk such as fraud, cyber-hacking, identity theft
and greater physical harm. Logistical and residential data could
be used to cause harm and danger to the users and their fami-
lies. Users may have much more difficulty in defending them-
selves in these situations. The dimensions of proving a breach
of their data or cyber-bullying, cyber-hacking especially by
foreign non-state actors (because of challenges in the design
of a metaverse platform) is likely to be a very difficult under-
taking. Significant expertise is likely to be needed in the case
of a known breach of personal data to protect and compensate
users. In addition to that the lack of legal protection and regu-
latory boundaries such as the General Data Protection Regu-
lation (GDPR) framework for Web 3 spaces, will open the
metaverse to all sorts of actors exploiting a dystopian creative
destruction-based innovation modus operandi.
and personal security. The moral and legal issues underlying
the metaverse can potentially harm the global cultural and
ethical ecosystem. Policy makers should be able to build a
global legal ecosystem keeping the cultural, ethnic and user
profiles in mind. Also, future research in the metaverse can
employ consequentialist and regulatory theories to investi-
gate these issues.

2.1.3 Security Issues

Since the inception of cyber transactions, security is always a
more significant concern in virtual space (Gale et al., 2022).
Security concerns are inevitably present in any advanced
technology applications. Compared to other technologies, the
metaverse offers more user behavioural tracking avenues to
developers and marketers, such as: eye-tracking, pupil move-
ments, geometric movements, physical movements, and so on
(Techtarget, 2022). Security can be breached when the data is
not used for the users' benefit but for the third party's benefit.
Such a scenario is more likely in the case of the metaverse,
where multiple tracking parameters and a free world environ-
ment can question the presence of privacy and data security.
Moreover, the security issues can accelerate psychological
and moral issues. For example: Given the question of per-
sonal security, meta bullying (PewResearchCenter, 2022) can
be prominently present in the metaverse. Incidents of meta bul-
lying can create traumatic experiences for users and also dam-
age the moral significance within the metaverse ecosystem. An
integrative operational ecosystem could benefit the metaverse.
A centralised information flow using blockchains could be
developed (Ali et al., 2023), enabling rigorous identity markers
integrated with citizenship identities, and authorising digital
currencies. The introductory stages of the metaverse are likely
to be more challenging as governance controls are established
and become stabilised over time. Users of the metaverse should
be fully informed of the negative aspects within the virtual
world. Future research can employ cultural and human-inter-
action theories to investigate user privacy expectations.

## 2.2 Metaverse- a Space of Known-Knowns and Known-Unknowns—Qeis Kamran

The Metaverse as an emerging space of reality is still in the
process of construction and evolution. While much research
needs to be done to understand the risks and the dark side
pertaining to the metaverse some observed dimensions are
briefly treated here.

2.2.1 Collection and Processing of Biometric Data

The evolution of the metaverse has pushed the dimension
of access to the users’ personal data to a new level. Captur-
ing the biometric data in addition to eye tracking, capturing

users' emotional behavior and access to observation of the
gait patterns of individuals, will enable contemporary tech
giants as Meta (formerly known as Facebook), in addition to
the other gaming platforms as Decentraland, Roblox, Sand-
box,Fortnight etc., collecting all forms of data, thus enhanc-
ing their unprecedented power dynamics over their users. This
information is gained in addition to the financial data and
playing patterns of the individuals with access to larger net-
work of contacts of the users and the themes of their dis-
cussions in their chatrooms. This large concentration of the
users' metadata with algorithmic machine learning powers
would push the asymmetry of power to a much higher level
of concentration as we have so far known, thus increasing
the notion of surveillance capitalism beyond control and
products of behavior futures designed to much enhance the
addictive powers in terms of economics of attention and
marketing of personal data to an ecosystem of data hungry
tech firms.

2.2.2 Metaverse Service Providers are Completely
Centralized

The terms of services rendered in the Metaverse are so far
completely centralized and largely controlled by the firms
operating the individual giant platforms. While, via the pos-
sibility of interoperability, control that could be reintroduced
to the users in terms of choice of play, individual invest-
ments, doing business, ownership of land and digital assets
and marketing, is still much in the far horizon. Hence each
platform would first try to limit the notion of interoperability
and thus increase switching costs so that more business is
done within their own domains.

Furthermore, metaverse platforms have the power to expose
their users to any kind of known and unknown challenges
based on the possible risks of cyberattacks to their platforms,
or to the partners in their greater ecosystem and value chains.
The breach of such data could expose many users to a much
higher level of risk such as fraud, cyber-hacking, identity theft
and greater physical harm. Logistical and residential data could
be used to cause harm and danger to the users and their fami-
lies. Users may have much more difficulty in defending them-
selves in these situations. The dimensions of proving a breach
of their data or cyber-bullying, cyber-hacking especially by
foreign non-state actors (because of challenges in the design
of a metaverse platform) is likely to be a very difficult under-
taking. Significant expertise is likely to be needed in the case
of a known breach of personal data to protect and compensate
users. In addition to that the lack of legal protection and regu-
latory boundaries such as the General Data Protection Regu-
lation (GDPR) framework for Web 3 spaces, will open the
metaverse to all sorts of actors exploiting a dystopian creative
destruction-based innovation modus operandi.
### 2.2.3 Dictating the Right to the Terms of Services

Metaverse platforms have the right to shape their terms and conditions of services in ways that will be more profitable to them, while locking their users in to their chosen boundaries. The regulatory governing authorities are still in a state of confusion over the metaverse. Hence the boundaries, wherein the whole emergence of the metaverse, assets owned in the metaverse as landownership, brand-equity, artistic and creative works etc., are not really defined. In a judgment from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) (Judgment of 22. 12. 2010 — Case C-393/09), it found that although these digital artefacts may not be considered as computer programs they can be still considered as works of art, hence be protectable by copyright regulatory frameworks, as long as these interfaces are the designers' and authors' own creative intellectual output. However, having to notify their users of any kind of transparent changes in their terms of conditions much digital assets could be frozen or just disappear. This could also result in a breach of wallet data of the users and before noticing much wealth and capital could change ownership to a non-tracible and non-detectable party in a country with very weak legal protection.

These mentioned cases create a high risk situations for the users where metaverse platforms are able to enforce full control over the users' assets and overall financial security.

### 2.2.4 Ban and the Access to the Platforms

With much possibility of innovation and evolution in the Metaverse the notion of making use of the freedom of speech or of political opinion may be censured. This does not mean that illegal behavior of any kind should be tolerated under the umbrella of freedom of speech. But moreover, the platforms may sanction their users for opinions that they do not share and thus limit or deny access to their platforms. In addition, based on the many chatrooms and communicational possibilities much political influence could be taken place without any kind of regulation, transparency or control. The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica partnership has illustrated the possibility of data-sharing and micro-targeting of users not only without their consent but moreover by being subjugated to unlimited volume of psychologically driven political campaigns that are free of any kind of public scrutiny, even after the facts of abusive and illegal conduct are known. Thus, the damages will be irreversible, as is in the cases of Brexit, Bolsonaro's conquest against the Amazonians or the Trump's MAGA-cult danger to the US constitution and overall democracy in the world.

### 2.2.5 Artificial Scarcity

In essence, digital assets are not really scarce. The artificial scarcity by design may bring a good return on investments

in the short term, but such dimensions and sources of revenue enhancement are still very novel and new. The artificial limitations of land or any kind of (digital) non-fungible token (NFT) provided as a twin by pairing it with a physical artifact, thus enhancing the artifact's overall value or on its own without twinning, may flood the market and cause huge losses of value. There is still vital lack of understanding of what truly is the metaverse in terms of its evolution and who decides what limits are created. The limits the platforms have set are likely to support their own profit-oriented causes in a Friedmanian sense of the social responsibility of business to increase its profits (Friedman, 1970).

Furthermore, the experience of assets artificially created are yet very limited. To what extent are the changes of ownership of a platform as Elon Musk's public attacks on the leaders of Twitter illustrated, will protect the users' assets. What if by the change of ownership, the appetite for profits or tolerance towards risk, shift and change the conduct of the platform's steering committee towards unknown or dangerous territories? These risks will be likely outsourced to users without them having any power over their resources, assets, brand equities and the conduct of the platforms.

### 2.2.6 Social Darwinism via Code

Algorithmic bias has been already recognized as a major flaw in the coding of artificial intelligence artifacts. “Algorithms themselves are a source of bias that is often overlooked in reviews of algorithmic bias, which tend to focus on discriminatory outcomes or data bias” (Kirkpatrick, 2016, p.16). Known cases of algorithmic bias (Stinson, 2022), could transfer real world problems into the metaverse. This could result in increasing social hierarchies and limiting access to diverse forms of capital (in a Bourdieuian sense). Algorithmic bias is based on an artificial distinction of social division of taste and habitus derived by a doxa in metaverse research and practice and new field of evolutionary social structuring derived from virtual spaces. The metaverse-based and artificially driven version of a utopian paradox breaks this doxa. By imagining a new design of a digital social world wherein: “anyone in whom there is a potential Raphael’ of painting or politics could develop without hindrance, it forces one to see that the concentration of the embodied or objectified instruments of production is scarcely less in politics than in art, and prevents one forgetting all the potential Raphaels whom the mechanisms responsible for this monopoly are excluded much more effectively than any ‘ideological state apparatuses’” (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 398).

While much known risk dimensions are postulated, our cyber-physical global societies must be ready for the many unknown-unknowns that the emergence and evolution of metaverse may bring and cultivate those ambidextrous organizational capabilities to cope with them.
### 2.2.3 Dictating the Right to the Terms of Services

Metaverse platforms have the right to shape their terms and conditions of services in ways that will be more profitable to them, while locking their users in to their chosen boundaries. The regulatory governing authorities are still in a state of confusion over the metaverse. Hence the boundaries, wherein the whole emergence of the metaverse, assets owned in the metaverse as landownership, brand-equity, artistic and creative works etc., are not really defined. In a judgment from the European Court of Justice (ECJ) (Judgment of 22. 12. 2010 — Case C-393/09), it found that although these digital artefacts may not be considered as computer programs they can be still considered as works of art, hence be protectable by copyright regulatory frameworks, as long as these interfaces are the designers' and authors' own creative intellectual output. However, having to notify their users of any kind of transparent changes in their terms of conditions much digital assets could be frozen or just disappear. This could also result in a breach of wallet data of the users and before noticing much wealth and capital could change ownership to a non-tracible and non-detectable party in a country with very weak legal protection.

These mentioned cases create a high risk situations for the users where metaverse platforms are able to enforce full control over the users' assets and overall financial security.

### 2.2.4 Ban and the Access to the Platforms

With much possibility of innovation and evolution in the Metaverse the notion of making use of the freedom of speech or of political opinion may be censured. This does not mean that illegal behavior of any kind should be tolerated under the umbrella of freedom of speech. But moreover, the platforms may sanction their users for opinions that they do not share and thus limit or deny access to their platforms. In addition, based on the many chatrooms and communicational possibilities much political influence could be taken place without any kind of regulation, transparency or control. The Facebook and Cambridge Analytica partnership has illustrated the possibility of data-sharing and micro-targeting of users not only without their consent but moreover by being subjugated to unlimited volume of psychologically driven political campaigns that are free of any kind of public scrutiny, even after the facts of abusive and illegal conduct are known. Thus, the damages will be irreversible, as is in the cases of Brexit, Bolsonaro's conquest against the Amazonians or the Trump's MAGA-cult danger to the US constitution and overall democracy in the world.

### 2.2.5 Artificial Scarcity

In essence, digital assets are not really scarce. The artificial scarcity by design may bring a good return on investments

in the short term, but such dimensions and sources of revenue enhancement are still very novel and new. The artificial limitations of land or any kind of (digital) non-fungible token (NFT) provided as a twin by pairing it with a physical artifact, thus enhancing the artifact's overall value or on its own without twinning, may flood the market and cause huge losses of value. There is still vital lack of understanding of what truly is the metaverse in terms of its evolution and who decides what limits are created. The limits the platforms have set are likely to support their own profit-oriented causes in a Friedmanian sense of the social responsibility of business to increase its profits (Friedman, 1970).

Furthermore, the experience of assets artificially created are yet very limited. To what extent are the changes of ownership of a platform as Elon Musk's public attacks on the leaders of Twitter illustrated, will protect the users' assets. What if by the change of ownership, the appetite for profits or tolerance towards risk, shift and change the conduct of the platform's steering committee towards unknown or dangerous territories? These risks will be likely outsourced to users without them having any power over their resources, assets, brand equities and the conduct of the platforms.

### 2.2.6 Social Darwinism via Code

Algorithmic bias has been already recognized as a major flaw in the coding of artificial intelligence artifacts. “Algorithms themselves are a source of bias that is often overlooked in reviews of algorithmic bias, which tend to focus on discriminatory outcomes or data bias” (Kirkpatrick, 2016, p.16). Known cases of algorithmic bias (Stinson, 2022), could transfer real world problems into the metaverse. This could result in increasing social hierarchies and limiting access to diverse forms of capital (in a Bourdieuian sense). Algorithmic bias is based on an artificial distinction of social division of taste and habitus derived by a doxa in metaverse research and practice and new field of evolutionary social structuring derived from virtual spaces. The metaverse-based and artificially driven version of a utopian paradox breaks this doxa. By imagining a new design of a digital social world wherein: “anyone in whom there is a potential Raphael’ of painting or politics could develop without hindrance, it forces one to see that the concentration of the embodied or objectified instruments of production is scarcely less in politics than in art, and prevents one forgetting all the potential Raphaels whom the mechanisms responsible for this monopoly are excluded much more effectively than any ‘ideological state apparatuses’” (Bourdieu, 1984, p. 398).

While much known risk dimensions are postulated, our cyber-physical global societies must be ready for the many unknown-unknowns that the emergence and evolution of metaverse may bring and cultivate those ambidextrous organizational capabilities to cope with them.

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>
## 2.3 Is it Time to be all in on the Metaverse?—
Giampaolo Viglia

Some innovations take time to become profitable and mature. Others will never reach a mature stage. A clear example is the so-called Google Glass, a prototype of smart glasses that has failed to meet consumers’ expectations (Leonard, 2022).

Despite the amount of Google searches for the word “Metaverse” has exploded in recent times (EuPortal, 2022), the company Meta who went all in on the metaverse has lost a significant amount of capital, falling by more than 70% on the US stock market by October 2022. In what follows we discuss few technological issues and some consumer vulnerability issues that are slowing down the metaverse revolution.

### 2.3.1 Technological Issues

Although the metaverse has the potential to transform how consumers interact with brands, it is now only seen as an alternate reality that follows the same fundamental laws as the physical world (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). In this new reality we still face important hardware limits.

Three types of technology are necessary for the metaverse to function properly (Chen, 2022). First, complete digital duplication must be accomplished either by scanning or digital construction. Next, networks must create real-time renderings of those physical surroundings in the cloud or on devices to make them accessible. Display technologies that deliver a genuine real-world experience will be the third and most difficult.

The structures and tools that support this new era are already in place and will soon enable the metaverse to thrive. Virtual content, cellular networks, display technology, rendering engines, and processing power are all expanding to new heights. For instance, scanning technology costs a small fraction of what they did a few years ago.

The equipment needed to create a 3D model at the time cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Structured light, for instance, "reads" a projected light pattern on an object, which is then recreated by scanning cameras that identify distortions brought on by differences in distance. 3D imaging makes use of a variety of supporting technologies. Another method, known as "Time of Flight," uses light pulses to illuminate a scene, which are then reflected and picked up by a sensor to identify and digitally incorporate moving objects.

### 2.3.2 Consumer Vulnerability Issues

A virtual and augmented reality lifestyle might cause loneliness. According to psychological studies, people desire to appear better than they actually are in order to enhance and

evaluate their own selves (Strube & Roemmele, 1985). This is especially clear on social media, where users frequently compare themselves to others. We might begin to favour using virtual environments because they offer this idealized world. However, if we begin to choose a virtual existence, our real, imperfect lives may seem terrible, which would be detrimental to our confidence and self-esteem. Policymakers are left with unanswered questions about how to curb the spread of harmful interactions and fraudulent information. With this criticism, other stakeholders may definitely assist. These worries would be allayed, in particular, by a deliberate spoke design in collaboration with tech businesses.

The internet environment can also offer support to someone who has a condition or is trying to lose weight. Recent studies have already confirmed this conclusion (Fletcher-Brown et al., 2021). However, the metaverse can be harmful if it takes the place of physical activity and in-person social interactions that are good for mental health, such as developing physical relationships and getting enough sleep.

### 2.3.3 Conclusion

The new marketing platform of the future, known as metaverse, will be used to present and breathe life into a variety of companies in the 3D interactive digital environment. The metaverse is a virtual representation of how things are done in the real world. Users can interact with one another in this 3D virtual environment by using avatars that look like them. This will have a significant impact on how businesses use the marketing function going forward as well as how we interact with one another. While the metaverse can bring enterpreneurial opportunities, it can also affect the wellbeing of consumers, especially the most vulnerable ones. Additionally, there are few technological issues, such as hardware and software issues. This suggests that a full adoption of the metaverse will take some time to materialise.

## 2.4 Critical Perspectives on the Metaverse: True Value, Privacy, and Diminished Reality – Philipp Rauschnabel, Reto Felix and Chris Hinsch

Most of the journal space devoted to the metaverse concept, especially within marketing, focuses on potential benefits for consumers and brands (e.g., Dwivedi et al., 2023a; Rauschnabel et al., 2022a). However, there are emerging critical voices that question these benefits and call for caution when interacting in this space. Unfortunately, the term metaverse is currently not consistently defined in the literature. We conceptualize the term metaverse as a fully immersive three-dimensional environment able to integrate physical and/or virtual worlds. As such, metaverse can be accessed through XR interfaces such as VR and AR (e.g., Dwivedi et al., 2023a; Rauschnabel et al., 2022b).
## 2.3 Is it Time to be all in on the Metaverse?—
Giampaolo Viglia

Some innovations take time to become profitable and mature. Others will never reach a mature stage. A clear example is the so-called Google Glass, a prototype of smart glasses that has failed to meet consumers’ expectations (Leonard, 2022).

Despite the amount of Google searches for the word “Metaverse” has exploded in recent times (EuPortal, 2022), the company Meta who went all in on the metaverse has lost a significant amount of capital, falling by more than 70% on the US stock market by October 2022. In what follows we discuss few technological issues and some consumer vulnerability issues that are slowing down the metaverse revolution.

### 2.3.1 Technological Issues

Although the metaverse has the potential to transform how consumers interact with brands, it is now only seen as an alternate reality that follows the same fundamental laws as the physical world (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). In this new reality we still face important hardware limits.

Three types of technology are necessary for the metaverse to function properly (Chen, 2022). First, complete digital duplication must be accomplished either by scanning or digital construction. Next, networks must create real-time renderings of those physical surroundings in the cloud or on devices to make them accessible. Display technologies that deliver a genuine real-world experience will be the third and most difficult.

The structures and tools that support this new era are already in place and will soon enable the metaverse to thrive. Virtual content, cellular networks, display technology, rendering engines, and processing power are all expanding to new heights. For instance, scanning technology costs a small fraction of what they did a few years ago.

The equipment needed to create a 3D model at the time cost hundreds of thousands of dollars. Structured light, for instance, "reads" a projected light pattern on an object, which is then recreated by scanning cameras that identify distortions brought on by differences in distance. 3D imaging makes use of a variety of supporting technologies. Another method, known as "Time of Flight," uses light pulses to illuminate a scene, which are then reflected and picked up by a sensor to identify and digitally incorporate moving objects.

### 2.3.2 Consumer Vulnerability Issues

A virtual and augmented reality lifestyle might cause loneliness. According to psychological studies, people desire to appear better than they actually are in order to enhance and

evaluate their own selves (Strube & Roemmele, 1985). This is especially clear on social media, where users frequently compare themselves to others. We might begin to favour using virtual environments because they offer this idealized world. However, if we begin to choose a virtual existence, our real, imperfect lives may seem terrible, which would be detrimental to our confidence and self-esteem. Policymakers are left with unanswered questions about how to curb the spread of harmful interactions and fraudulent information. With this criticism, other stakeholders may definitely assist. These worries would be allayed, in particular, by a deliberate spoke design in collaboration with tech businesses.

The internet environment can also offer support to someone who has a condition or is trying to lose weight. Recent studies have already confirmed this conclusion (Fletcher-Brown et al., 2021). However, the metaverse can be harmful if it takes the place of physical activity and in-person social interactions that are good for mental health, such as developing physical relationships and getting enough sleep.

### 2.3.3 Conclusion

The new marketing platform of the future, known as metaverse, will be used to present and breathe life into a variety of companies in the 3D interactive digital environment. The metaverse is a virtual representation of how things are done in the real world. Users can interact with one another in this 3D virtual environment by using avatars that look like them. This will have a significant impact on how businesses use the marketing function going forward as well as how we interact with one another. While the metaverse can bring enterpreneurial opportunities, it can also affect the wellbeing of consumers, especially the most vulnerable ones. Additionally, there are few technological issues, such as hardware and software issues. This suggests that a full adoption of the metaverse will take some time to materialise.

## 2.4 Critical Perspectives on the Metaverse: True Value, Privacy, and Diminished Reality – Philipp Rauschnabel, Reto Felix and Chris Hinsch

Most of the journal space devoted to the metaverse concept, especially within marketing, focuses on potential benefits for consumers and brands (e.g., Dwivedi et al., 2023a; Rauschnabel et al., 2022a). However, there are emerging critical voices that question these benefits and call for caution when interacting in this space. Unfortunately, the term metaverse is currently not consistently defined in the literature. We conceptualize the term metaverse as a fully immersive three-dimensional environment able to integrate physical and/or virtual worlds. As such, metaverse can be accessed through XR interfaces such as VR and AR (e.g., Dwivedi et al., 2023a; Rauschnabel et al., 2022b).
Metaverse platforms also tend to imitate communities or societies; for instance, many offer some sort of ownership (e.g., virtual space, non-fungible tokens), the presence of others (e.g., in form of avatars), activities (e.g., concerts, games etc.), payment methods (e.g., crypto currencies), laws (i.e., specific rules), freedom of movement (discussed as interoperability), certain structures (often some sort of decentralization, e.g., through blockchain technology), and a three-dimensional environment (typically in augmented and virtual reality – summarized as XR; Rauschnabel et al., 2022b). We note that strictly speaking, the “true” metaverse does not exist today (Dwivedi et al., 2023a). Emerging common platforms, such as VRChat, Mozilla Hubs, The Sandbox, Decentraland, Spatial.io, SuperWorld, and SecondLife are considered to be “metaverse-like”, and therefore, are often called “proto metaverses”. For simplicity, we use the term metaverse throughout this section.

The following paragraphs discuss three major potential challenges of the metaverse concept that are particularly relevant from a consumer and societal perspective: The value of virtual products, privacy risks, and challenges associated with diminished reality. We note that this list based on the very early stages of metaverse development, and our negative tone should not be taken as call for political actions to hinder metaverse developments. Rather, we argue that an early understanding of these negative aspects can complement prior research and lead to a more theoretically holistic and societally beneficial understanding of this domain. Furthermore, addressing potential drivers of consumer backlash is likely also in the interest of brands seeking to develop the metaverse (e.g., hardware firms, platforms, content creators, marketers, etc.), since such threats might limit consumer adoption or trigger political intervention.

## 2.4.1 A Critical Look on the Value of Virtual Content

Interoperable avatars, i.e., a single avatar that can represent a specific person across various applications (Dwivedi et al., 2022a; Park et al., 2022), is a concept that is central to a true metaverse environment. Participants will be much more likely to invest in aesthetically augmenting their virtual appearance if their avatar is persistent and can be used in multiple virtual or augmented spaces. This will likely stimulate the demand for branded virtual merchandise (e.g., branded virtual handbags, jewelry, or shoes). NFTs provide a technological means to clarify ownership of these virtual items (Hofstetter et al., 2022). NFTs should be distinguished from digital rights management or copyright protection as they signify true ownership stored through blockchain technology. Brands using NFTs can allow users to verify the originality of their products and prove that they are not counterfeits or unlicensed copies.

While these developments may open entirely new opportunities for marketers and brands, they will also usher in a host of challenges. For example, new contractual arrangements concerning digital property will need to be both developed and policed. The ease of copying data on digital platforms may facilitate potential snowballing or unofficially replicated material flooding the markets. Likewise, young consumers might over purchase immaterial “gimmicks” that serve little purpose beyond digital status symbols. Though most expect the cost of virtual goods to be a fraction of what physical goods cost, this is not always the case. For example, a virtual Gucci handbag recently sold for $4,115 while the physical bag retails at $3,400 (Ernest, 2021). Ultimately, conspicuous consumption and materialism, which typically deteriorate rather than increase consumer well-being (Dittmar et al., 2014), may be accelerated through the technological catalysts to be found in a future metaverse. Furthermore, transactions in the metaverse will likely be based on crypto currencies. While several challenges of crypto currencies have been solved (e.g., high energy consumption for mining), the underlying principles (blockchain technology, fluctuations etc.) remain quite complex, and platforms often lack mechanisms to protect consumers (Trautman, 2022). These aspects may be particularly crucial for young and less tech-savvy consumers who might use these platforms only to follow norms dictated by group pressure and status seeking.

Metaverse providers may address these issues by implementing and policing strict age restrictions, developing user friendly interfaces, and the application of clear consumer protection rules (e.g., return policies). The implementation of these measures can be challenging, especially if metaverse platforms are decentralized and/or located in countries with less developed political and economic regulatory systems. However, we argue that the most promising approach to these issues is to educate societies so that they may have a deep understanding of metaverse market mechanisms.

## 2.4.2 New Challenges of Privacy

Privacy is the primary issue surrounding both legacy social media and burgeoning metaverse applications. The most common issues center around the threat of sharing personal information with powerful entities, including brands. The marketers managing these brands can, through monitoring behaviors and brand sentiment exhibited online, determine when an individual is most likely to respond to particular types of marketing messages (Liu et al., 2020). The dynamic nature of these digital spaces allows for an unbroken chain of A/B testing that may allow marketers to fine tune their messages to increasingly manipulate individuals. More importantly, characteristics of those interacting in digital spaces can be extrapolated to others who might avoid these

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /></figure>
Metaverse platforms also tend to imitate communities or societies; for instance, many offer some sort of ownership (e.g., virtual space, non-fungible tokens), the presence of others (e.g., in form of avatars), activities (e.g., concerts, games etc.), payment methods (e.g., crypto currencies), laws (i.e., specific rules), freedom of movement (discussed as interoperability), certain structures (often some sort of decentralization, e.g., through blockchain technology), and a three-dimensional environment (typically in augmented and virtual reality – summarized as XR; Rauschnabel et al., 2022b). We note that strictly speaking, the “true” metaverse does not exist today (Dwivedi et al., 2023a). Emerging common platforms, such as VRChat, Mozilla Hubs, The Sandbox, Decentraland, Spatial.io, SuperWorld, and SecondLife are considered to be “metaverse-like”, and therefore, are often called “proto metaverses”. For simplicity, we use the term metaverse throughout this section.

The following paragraphs discuss three major potential challenges of the metaverse concept that are particularly relevant from a consumer and societal perspective: The value of virtual products, privacy risks, and challenges associated with diminished reality. We note that this list based on the very early stages of metaverse development, and our negative tone should not be taken as call for political actions to hinder metaverse developments. Rather, we argue that an early understanding of these negative aspects can complement prior research and lead to a more theoretically holistic and societally beneficial understanding of this domain. Furthermore, addressing potential drivers of consumer backlash is likely also in the interest of brands seeking to develop the metaverse (e.g., hardware firms, platforms, content creators, marketers, etc.), since such threats might limit consumer adoption or trigger political intervention.

## 2.4.1 A Critical Look on the Value of Virtual Content

Interoperable avatars, i.e., a single avatar that can represent a specific person across various applications (Dwivedi et al., 2022a; Park et al., 2022), is a concept that is central to a true metaverse environment. Participants will be much more likely to invest in aesthetically augmenting their virtual appearance if their avatar is persistent and can be used in multiple virtual or augmented spaces. This will likely stimulate the demand for branded virtual merchandise (e.g., branded virtual handbags, jewelry, or shoes). NFTs provide a technological means to clarify ownership of these virtual items (Hofstetter et al., 2022). NFTs should be distinguished from digital rights management or copyright protection as they signify true ownership stored through blockchain technology. Brands using NFTs can allow users to verify the originality of their products and prove that they are not counterfeits or unlicensed copies.

While these developments may open entirely new opportunities for marketers and brands, they will also usher in a host of challenges. For example, new contractual arrangements concerning digital property will need to be both developed and policed. The ease of copying data on digital platforms may facilitate potential snowballing or unofficially replicated material flooding the markets. Likewise, young consumers might over purchase immaterial “gimmicks” that serve little purpose beyond digital status symbols. Though most expect the cost of virtual goods to be a fraction of what physical goods cost, this is not always the case. For example, a virtual Gucci handbag recently sold for $4,115 while the physical bag retails at $3,400 (Ernest, 2021). Ultimately, conspicuous consumption and materialism, which typically deteriorate rather than increase consumer well-being (Dittmar et al., 2014), may be accelerated through the technological catalysts to be found in a future metaverse. Furthermore, transactions in the metaverse will likely be based on crypto currencies. While several challenges of crypto currencies have been solved (e.g., high energy consumption for mining), the underlying principles (blockchain technology, fluctuations etc.) remain quite complex, and platforms often lack mechanisms to protect consumers (Trautman, 2022). These aspects may be particularly crucial for young and less tech-savvy consumers who might use these platforms only to follow norms dictated by group pressure and status seeking.

Metaverse providers may address these issues by implementing and policing strict age restrictions, developing user friendly interfaces, and the application of clear consumer protection rules (e.g., return policies). The implementation of these measures can be challenging, especially if metaverse platforms are decentralized and/or located in countries with less developed political and economic regulatory systems. However, we argue that the most promising approach to these issues is to educate societies so that they may have a deep understanding of metaverse market mechanisms.

## 2.4.2 New Challenges of Privacy

Privacy is the primary issue surrounding both legacy social media and burgeoning metaverse applications. The most common issues center around the threat of sharing personal information with powerful entities, including brands. The marketers managing these brands can, through monitoring behaviors and brand sentiment exhibited online, determine when an individual is most likely to respond to particular types of marketing messages (Liu et al., 2020). The dynamic nature of these digital spaces allows for an unbroken chain of A/B testing that may allow marketers to fine tune their messages to increasingly manipulate individuals. More importantly, characteristics of those interacting in digital spaces can be extrapolated to others who might avoid these

<figure><img src="image_7.png" /></figure>
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2** Removing real world content through diminished reality (Illustration: Annika Pezold, UniBw)</figcaption></figure>

technologies. If this is an issue in legacy social media, it has potentially both deeper and broader impacts in metaverse applications. Many XR technologies that are required to access the metaverse continuously collect information about users, such as eye tracking cataloging offline focal points. AI algorithms are so powerful that they can use data collected in a device's inertial measurement unit (IMU) and controllers to estimate the movement of currently untrackable body parts, such as legs (Winkler et al., 2022). Likewise, many XR devices make use of tracking technology to improve the user experience, such as through foveated rendering (a technique that uses eye tracking information to decrease rendering workload by reducing the resolution and sharpness in the peripheral vision area). Furthermore, inside-out tracking technologies in VR can generate information about a user's physical environment, which is typically one's personal space. The amount of information gathered from such devices goes way beyond what is possible with social media technology that tracks “only” digital variables.

With AR, the potential challenges increase even further. AR devices are based on a detailed understanding of a user and their physical context (von der Au et al., 2023). In contrast to VR devices, AR glasses are often superior in terms of tracking capacity (e.g., multiple cameras and depth-scanners, LIDAR, etc.). Since AR glasses can be worn in virtually any situation, the potential threat to a user's privacy is extended to the privacy of other people who surround the user (Rauschnabel et al., 2018).

Both hardware and software offer potential approaches to address privacy issues. Similar to dash cams in cars that store information only for a limited time and overwrite information that is not accessed by a certain date, metaverse applications may be designed to wipe all consumer data after a relatively brief time period. Hardware producers might also ban facial recognition or implement automated anonymization technologies. However, these measures should be balanced against the loss of functionality that might accompany them. Regardless of what the designers do, tech savvy users and hackers will eventually find ways to bypass these mechanisms. Similarly, cities might ban the use

of XR technologies in public spaces which would stall XR development. Furthermore, such bans might be challenging to implement, especially since tracking devices are getting smaller and AR glasses can be virtually indistinguishable from regular glasses.

### 2.4.3 Challenges of Diminished Reality

Legacy media and social media can impact our perception of reality only by censoring what they cover/report and, as a result, what we perceive. Metaverse technology can actively blot out information from the real world that we might find offensive or otherwise undesirable. In particular, “diminished reality” is a specific form of AR that estimates an object’s background and overlays data to blot the object out of the user’s view (Rauschnabel et al., 2022b). Diminished reality can eliminate physical objects from the user’s perception of the real-world, even though the product remains in the physical world. On the positive side, consumers might appreciate ad blockers that use diminished reality to blot out annoying signage.

However, diminished reality technology can also raise concerns. Elimination of physical objects from a user's perception may result in collisions. Furthermore, the entity that controls the ability to diminish reality can also be a cause of concern. Hackers, legacy media, or government entities might secretly install diminished reality applications on AR smart glasses to alter what some individuals perceive in an effort to manipulate the user's attitudes or behaviors. However, users themselves might also use diminished reality unethically. For example, homelessness has become a significant issue in many major cities, and the newly elected mayor of Los Angeles, California, has issued an emergency declaration to allow for greater flexibility in using public funds to address the problem. Diminished reality could be used to overwrite objectionable content so that users do not even perceive the presence of homeless individuals. Figure 2 shows that a homeless person can be excluded from the user's view allowing for a more “pleasant” perception of the environment (Fig. 2).
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 2** Removing real world content through diminished reality (Illustration: Annika Pezold, UniBw)</figcaption></figure>

technologies. If this is an issue in legacy social media, it has potentially both deeper and broader impacts in metaverse applications. Many XR technologies that are required to access the metaverse continuously collect information about users, such as eye tracking cataloging offline focal points. AI algorithms are so powerful that they can use data collected in a device’s inertial measurement unit (IMU) and controllers to estimate the movement of currently untrackable body parts, such as legs (Winkler et al., 2022). Likewise, many XR devices make use of tracking technology to improve the user experience, such as through foveated rendering (a technique that uses eye tracking information to decrease rendering workload by reducing the resolution and sharpness in the peripheral vision area). Furthermore, inside-out tracking technologies in VR can generate information about a user’s physical environment, which is typically one’s personal space. The amount of information gathered from such devices goes way beyond what is possible with social media technology that tracks “only” digital variables.

With AR, the potential challenges increase even further. AR devices are based on a detailed understanding of a user and their physical context (von der Au et al., 2023). In contrast to VR devices, AR glasses are often superior in terms of tracking capacity (e.g., multiple cameras and depth-scanners, LIDAR, etc.). Since AR glasses can be worn in virtually any situation, the potential threat to a user’s privacy is extended to the privacy of other people who surround the user (Rauschnabel et al., 2018).

Both hardware and software offer potential approaches to address privacy issues. Similar to dash cams in cars that store information only for a limited time and overwrite information that is not accessed by a certain date, metaverse applications may be designed to wipe all consumer data after a relatively brief time period. Hardware producers might also ban facial recognition or implement automated anonymization technologies. However, these measures should be balanced against the loss of functionality that might accompany them. Regardless of what the designers do, tech savvy users and hackers will eventually find ways to bypass these mechanisms. Similarly, cities might ban the use

of XR technologies in public spaces which would stall XR development. Furthermore, such bans might be challenging to implement, especially since tracking devices are getting smaller and AR glasses can be virtually indistinguishable from regular glasses.

### 2.4.3 Challenges of Diminished Reality

Legacy media and social media can impact our perception of reality only by censoring what they cover/report and, as a result, what we perceive. Metaverse technology can actively blot out information from the real world that we might find offensive or otherwise undesirable. In particular, “diminished reality” is a specific form of AR that estimates an object’s background and overlays data to blot the object out of the user’s view (Rauschnabel et al., 2022b). Diminished reality can eliminate physical objects from the user’s perception of the real-world, even though the product remains in the physical world. On the positive side, consumers might appreciate ad blockers that use diminished reality to blot out annoying signage.

However, diminished reality technology can also raise concerns. Elimination of physical objects from a user’s perception may result in collisions. Furthermore, the entity that controls the ability to diminish reality can also be a cause of concern. Hackers, legacy media, or government entities might secretly install diminished reality applications on AR smart glasses to alter what some individuals perceive in an effort to manipulate the user’s attitudes or behaviors. However, users themselves might also use diminished reality unethically. For example, homelessness has become a significant issue in many major cities, and the newly elected mayor of Los Angeles, California, has issued an emergency declaration to allow for greater flexibility in using public funds to address the problem. Diminished reality could be used to overwrite objectionable content so that users do not even perceive the presence of homeless individuals. Figure 2 shows that a homeless person can be excluded from the user’s view allowing for a more “pleasant” perception of the environment (Fig. 2).
Overall, we contend that diminishing reality may prove to be one of the most pressing challenges associated with the emerging metaverse. Preventing intentional unethical use initiated by the user poses a more difficult problem. Terms of use may prove effective with many users, though savvy users will almost certainly find workarounds to these issues. As to the possibility that hackers, government entities, or legacy media may find a way to manipulate the user's perception through this technology, these solutions are yet to be discovered.

### 2.4.4 A Question about Regulations

How should policy makers react to these challenges? There is a spectrum ranging from “laissez fair” to strict regulations and prohibitions, but each has its own set of issues. Many countries need to determine their desired position on this scale. For instance, the European Union currently has legal frameworks including Digital Rights Act (DRA), Digital Service Act (DSA) or General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that provide generic legal boundaries applicable to today’s metaverse-like platforms; however, adjustments might be needed once true metaverse platforms emerge. Furthermore, too much regulation may kill innovation in the metaverse context. The metaverse is rapidly evolving and it is anyone’s guess what this format will look like in the coming years. Depending on the characteristics designed into each use case and the evolution of the underlying technologies (e.g., blockchain), early-stage regulations stand a good chance of either not impacting the variables that drive adoption or stifling forward progress. We argue that political interventions, if any, should proactively focus on supporting the development of metaverse technologies as these technologies mature. Academics and technology pioneers are still struggling to understand exactly what the metaverse is and how it will look like in the future. Cross-disciplinary research collaborations as well as firm sponsored R&D projects will drastically expand what we know about this medium. Prospective users must understand what the metaverse is, how they can benefit from it, and how they can reduce the risks associated with participation in this rapidly emerging domain.

### 2.4.5 Limitations and Future Research

The paragraphs above discussed three significant challenges facing the metaverse: Privacy, diminished reality, and the true value of virtual objects. We acknowledge that this list is not exhaustive, and topics such as cyber mobbing, metaverse addiction, or the threats associated with the complexity of the technology (e.g., underlying blockchain technology) have not been addressed. We call for future research to systematically assess the dark side of the metaverse. Such

findings should be used to design frameworks for a better metaverse future that benefits, consumers, firms, and society as a whole.

## 2.5 Human – Computer Interface in Metaverse: Perspectives from Dark Side – Satinder Juneja, Preeti Tak & Ashish Gupta

The term "Metaverse" first appeared in the classic science fiction book "Snow Crash" written by Neal Stephenson in 1992, wherein he conceptualised "metaverse" as a community of virtual, lifelike avatars that assemble in true-to-life 3D virtual reality settings (Joshua, 2017; Dwivedi et al., 2022a, 2023a). Informally defined as the meeting point between the physical and virtual worlds, the metaverse is still partially in the realm of speculation because it is in its early stages and has not been fully defined (Ball, 2022). Given the steep proliferation of technology in our lives, we live in a network. Be it communication, e.g., telephony, text message exchange (WhatsApp or SMS), participating in social media or going about doing usual tasks, e.g., paying by credit card, entering the airport by QR code scan of our boarding pass, writing, and sharing on blogs. We are leaving multiple digital traces for each interaction and more. Gartner (2022) predicted that 25% of users would spend at least one hour per day in the metaverse by 2026. The scale and speed with which this data is being amassed and interlinked have given rise to computational social science. The metaverse, given its base, is deeply rooted in enabling technologies such as blockchain, augmented reality, virtual reality, etc., and would rely heavily on Human–Computer Interface (HCI). The extant literature has discussed the seamless opportunities which Metaverse offers to the business to engage and reach consumers in different domains such as fashion, retail, tourism, hospitality, advertising, branding etc. (Dwivedi et al., 2022a, 2023a; Hollensen et al., 2022; Kim, 2021; Joy et al., 2022; Buhalis et al., 2022; Gursoy et al., 2022) and consumers. Despite the many opportunities that the metaverse provides, an increasing number of incidents show that the platform undoubtedly has a "dark side".

The infrastructure that supports the metaverse, comprising both traditional Information Technology (IT) and Operational Technology (OT), comprises a wide range of technologies that manage component sensing, physical interconnections, and interactions. While most IT protocols can be made secure, there are no design guidelines for information security and privacy in OT. Bad actors will therefore be able to thwart commercial transactions by stealing or changing the goods, the service, or the intellectual property (IP), stealing or diverting the buyer's funds, eavesdropping, or manipulating the transactions that may be happening between a seller and a buyer.

<figure><img src="image_8.png" /></figure>
Overall, we contend that diminishing reality may prove to be one of the most pressing challenges associated with the emerging metaverse. Preventing intentional unethical use initiated by the user poses a more difficult problem. Terms of use may prove effective with many users, though savvy users will almost certainly find workarounds to these issues. As to the possibility that hackers, government entities, or legacy media may find a way to manipulate the user's perception through this technology, these solutions are yet to be discovered.

### 2.4.4 A Question about Regulations

How should policy makers react to these challenges? There is a spectrum ranging from “laissez fair” to strict regulations and prohibitions, but each has its own set of issues. Many countries need to determine their desired position on this scale. For instance, the European Union currently has legal frameworks including Digital Rights Act (DRA), Digital Service Act (DSA) or General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) that provide generic legal boundaries applicable to today’s metaverse-like platforms; however, adjustments might be needed once true metaverse platforms emerge. Furthermore, too much regulation may kill innovation in the metaverse context. The metaverse is rapidly evolving and it is anyone’s guess what this format will look like in the coming years. Depending on the characteristics designed into each use case and the evolution of the underlying technologies (e.g., blockchain), early-stage regulations stand a good chance of either not impacting the variables that drive adoption or stifling forward progress. We argue that political interventions, if any, should proactively focus on supporting the development of metaverse technologies as these technologies mature. Academics and technology pioneers are still struggling to understand exactly what the metaverse is and how it will look like in the future. Cross-disciplinary research collaborations as well as firm sponsored R&D projects will drastically expand what we know about this medium. Prospective users must understand what the metaverse is, how they can benefit from it, and how they can reduce the risks associated with participation in this rapidly emerging domain.

### 2.4.5 Limitations and Future Research

The paragraphs above discussed three significant challenges facing the metaverse: Privacy, diminished reality, and the true value of virtual objects. We acknowledge that this list is not exhaustive, and topics such as cyber mobbing, metaverse addiction, or the threats associated with the complexity of the technology (e.g., underlying blockchain technology) have not been addressed. We call for future research to systematically assess the dark side of the metaverse. Such

findings should be used to design frameworks for a better metaverse future that benefits, consumers, firms, and society as a whole.

## 2.5 Human – Computer Interface in Metaverse: Perspectives from Dark Side – Satinder Juneja, Preeti Tak & Ashish Gupta

The term "Metaverse" first appeared in the classic science fiction book "Snow Crash" written by Neal Stephenson in 1992, wherein he conceptualised "metaverse" as a community of virtual, lifelike avatars that assemble in true-to-life 3D virtual reality settings (Joshua, 2017; Dwivedi et al., 2022a, 2023a). Informally defined as the meeting point between the physical and virtual worlds, the metaverse is still partially in the realm of speculation because it is in its early stages and has not been fully defined (Ball, 2022). Given the steep proliferation of technology in our lives, we live in a network. Be it communication, e.g., telephony, text message exchange (WhatsApp or SMS), participating in social media or going about doing usual tasks, e.g., paying by credit card, entering the airport by QR code scan of our boarding pass, writing, and sharing on blogs. We are leaving multiple digital traces for each interaction and more. Gartner (2022) predicted that 25% of users would spend at least one hour per day in the metaverse by 2026. The scale and speed with which this data is being amassed and interlinked have given rise to computational social science. The metaverse, given its base, is deeply rooted in enabling technologies such as blockchain, augmented reality, virtual reality, etc., and would rely heavily on Human–Computer Interface (HCI). The extant literature has discussed the seamless opportunities which Metaverse offers to the business to engage and reach consumers in different domains such as fashion, retail, tourism, hospitality, advertising, branding etc. (Dwivedi et al., 2022a, 2023a; Hollensen et al., 2022; Kim, 2021; Joy et al., 2022; Buhalis et al., 2022; Gursoy et al., 2022) and consumers. Despite the many opportunities that the metaverse provides, an increasing number of incidents show that the platform undoubtedly has a "dark side".

The infrastructure that supports the metaverse, comprising both traditional Information Technology (IT) and Operational Technology (OT), comprises a wide range of technologies that manage component sensing, physical interconnections, and interactions. While most IT protocols can be made secure, there are no design guidelines for information security and privacy in OT. Bad actors will therefore be able to thwart commercial transactions by stealing or changing the goods, the service, or the intellectual property (IP), stealing or diverting the buyer's funds, eavesdropping, or manipulating the transactions that may be happening between a seller and a buyer.

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>
### 2.5.1 Dark Side in Metaverse

The following are potential areas of the dark side in the metaverse:

**Spoofing and Phishing** To navigate the metaverse, everyone has to create virtual avatars. As the platform is still evolving, there are instances of creating convincing 3D representations of real-world brands/products/humans, which makes identity protection essential. However, the metaverse has failed to comply with the same, and in May 2022, a phishing scam was reported on Decentraland, a popular Ethereum-based virtual world (World Economic Forum, 2022a). The scammers were able to create a fake website that was similar to the Decentraland website. The websites then tricked users into inputting their private keys, allowing the scammers to steal their cryptocurrency. With few regulations and less familiarity with platforms, the consumers and the brands are at risk (Pooyandeh et al., 2022).

**Privacy Concerns** The metaverse might collect and collate users' personal information, including eye-tracking, physical reactions, and haptics (Fernandez & Hui, 2022; Hirsch, 2022). Due to the immersion, the indistinguishability of virtual and reality, and the multi-sensory nature of the metaverse, more specific user data will be gathered than on earlier platforms like social networks, which increases the interest of unethical parties in this information, increasing the risk of network attacks (Leenes, 2008; Zhao et al., 2022).

**Cybercrime & Laws (Drug trafficking, terrorism, and other illicit business)** The metaverse's regulatory ambiguities will need to be identified and resolved (World Economic Forum, 2022b). For example, there is no clarity on when is a virtual act criminal in nature? Today on the internet, shadowy users can access covert services via the "dark web" a secretive environment, and there is much illicit trade and terrorist-aiding activities are being held there, away from the prying eyes of authorities (Chertoff, 2017; Kaur & Randhawa, 2020; Weimann, 2016). The sheer scale, experiential dimension, coupled with anonymous nature of the metaverse would enhance this issue to altogether a different level.

**Inequality in Metaverse and rise of Digital Divide** How can we promise that everyone has access to the handsets, headsets, and connectivity required to participate in the metaverse? While the benefit of access means participation in all societal domains, the lack of it would alienate the deprived ones from such participation in societal domains and can potentially impair societal development (Van Dijk, 2017). The impact of digital access and divide was visible during COVID-19 (Ramsetty & Adams, 2020), which shows that digital access can provide access to better benefits for various sections of society.

**Gambling** Gambling is popular and easy in the metaverse, where minors can gamble even with age restrictions. Rosen (2022) reported that the ICE Poker Virtual Casino has made over $7.5 million in the previous three months and listed as the high daily traffic to Decentraland (a popular metaverse location). As users gamble tokens rather than actual money, the lawsuits against them are frequently dismissed, thus, leading to duping/cheating of gullible users.

**Vulnerable and Impressionable Children and the Effect** How do we keep an eye on what children are doing and seeing as they immerse themselves in the metaverse, so that we can keep them safe? Children are highly prone to implicit and explicit cues and peer pressure. The scale, attractiveness (sound, imagery, virtual, 3D), and inquisitiveness of the metaverse are bound to draw children to it. Several adolescents committed suicide in different countries because the video game "Blue Whale challenge" shows the havoc internet can have on the lives of this impressionable population (Lupariello et al., 2018). Given the avatar concept and ability to quickly change due to digital elements, the threat of cyberbullying can also have a larger impact on children in the era of the metaverse (Wong-Lo et al., 2011). In December, Hayward (2022) reported that Epic Games was penalised $520 million in settlements by U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) which involves a $245 million refund to impacted customers by the FTC for what it deems "dark patterns" and "billing practises," as well as a $275 million fine that will be paid to the agency for breaking the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The platform collected personal data from children under age 13 without notifying the parents. Additionally, Epic deceived the gamers into unintentionally spending hundreds of millions of dollars on in-game purchases by using "counterintuitive, inconsistent, and confusing button configuration" (Hayward, 2022).

**Negative Impact of Health and Possible Addiction** How can we tackle the health risks of an immersive environment where VR hangovers, post-VR sorrow, and cyber addiction are real? International population studies have shown that internet addiction is proliferating quickly and is becoming more widespread globally. Smartphone use is dramatically expanding, and social networking sites are becoming increasingly popular, leading to psychological risk factors (Chertoff, 2017).

**Anti-Social Behaviour** The metaverse is conceptually based on avatars which means one could have different avatars from the actual person, which could be very different from the 'real-verse' (Glavish, 2022). The anonymity or personification allowed due to this avatar may encourage some unscrupulous actors to exhibit dark and uncivil behaviour towards other strata of society. As per Non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate, within the VRChat platform, a
### 2.5.1 Dark Side in Metaverse

The following are potential areas of the dark side in the metaverse:

**Spoofing and Phishing** To navigate the metaverse, everyone has to create virtual avatars. As the platform is still evolving, there are instances of creating convincing 3D representations of real-world brands/products/humans, which makes identity protection essential. However, the metaverse has failed to comply with the same, and in May 2022, a phishing scam was reported on Decentraland, a popular Ethereum-based virtual world (World Economic Forum, 2022a). The scammers were able to create a fake website that was similar to the Decentraland website. The websites then tricked users into inputting their private keys, allowing the scammers to steal their cryptocurrency. With few regulations and less familiarity with platforms, the consumers and the brands are at risk (Pooyandeh et al., 2022).

**Privacy Concerns** The metaverse might collect and collate users' personal information, including eye-tracking, physical reactions, and haptics (Fernandez & Hui, 2022; Hirsch, 2022). Due to the immersion, the indistinguishability of virtual and reality, and the multi-sensory nature of the metaverse, more specific user data will be gathered than on earlier platforms like social networks, which increases the interest of unethical parties in this information, increasing the risk of network attacks (Leenes, 2008; Zhao et al., 2022).

**Cybercrime & Laws (Drug trafficking, terrorism, and other illicit business)** The metaverse's regulatory ambiguities will need to be identified and resolved (World Economic Forum, 2022b). For example, there is no clarity on when is a virtual act criminal in nature? Today on the internet, shadowy users can access covert services via the "dark web" a secretive environment, and there is much illicit trade and terrorist-aiding activities are being held there, away from the prying eyes of authorities (Chertoff, 2017; Kaur & Randhawa, 2020; Weimann, 2016). The sheer scale, experiential dimension, coupled with anonymous nature of the metaverse would enhance this issue to altogether a different level.

**Inequality in Metaverse and rise of Digital Divide** How can we promise that everyone has access to the handsets, headsets, and connectivity required to participate in the metaverse? While the benefit of access means participation in all societal domains, the lack of it would alienate the deprived ones from such participation in societal domains and can potentially impair societal development (Van Dijk, 2017). The impact of digital access and divide was visible during COVID-19 (Ramsetty & Adams, 2020), which shows that digital access can provide access to better benefits for various sections of society.

**Gambling** Gambling is popular and easy in the metaverse, where minors can gamble even with age restrictions. Rosen (2022) reported that the ICE Poker Virtual Casino has made over $7.5 million in the previous three months and listed as the high daily traffic to Decentraland (a popular metaverse location). As users gamble tokens rather than actual money, the lawsuits against them are frequently dismissed, thus, leading to duping/cheating of gullible users.

**Vulnerable and Impressionable Children and the Effect** How do we keep an eye on what children are doing and seeing as they immerse themselves in the metaverse, so that we can keep them safe? Children are highly prone to implicit and explicit cues and peer pressure. The scale, attractiveness (sound, imagery, virtual, 3D), and inquisitiveness of the metaverse are bound to draw children to it. Several adolescents committed suicide in different countries because the video game "Blue Whale challenge" shows the havoc internet can have on the lives of this impressionable population (Lupariello et al., 2018). Given the avatar concept and ability to quickly change due to digital elements, the threat of cyberbullying can also have a larger impact on children in the era of the metaverse (Wong-Lo et al., 2011). In December, Hayward (2022) reported that Epic Games was penalised $520 million in settlements by U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) which involves a $245 million refund to impacted customers by the FTC for what it deems "dark patterns" and "billing practises," as well as a $275 million fine that will be paid to the agency for breaking the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). The platform collected personal data from children under age 13 without notifying the parents. Additionally, Epic deceived the gamers into unintentionally spending hundreds of millions of dollars on in-game purchases by using "counterintuitive, inconsistent, and confusing button configuration" (Hayward, 2022).

**Negative Impact of Health and Possible Addiction** How can we tackle the health risks of an immersive environment where VR hangovers, post-VR sorrow, and cyber addiction are real? International population studies have shown that internet addiction is proliferating quickly and is becoming more widespread globally. Smartphone use is dramatically expanding, and social networking sites are becoming increasingly popular, leading to psychological risk factors (Chertoff, 2017).

**Anti-Social Behaviour** The metaverse is conceptually based on avatars which means one could have different avatars from the actual person, which could be very different from the 'real-verse' (Glavish, 2022). The anonymity or personification allowed due to this avatar may encourage some unscrupulous actors to exhibit dark and uncivil behaviour towards other strata of society. As per Non-profit Center for Countering Digital Hate, within the VRChat platform, a
violating incident, occurs about once every seven minutes (Frenkel & Browning, 2021). The metaverse can encourage latent dark/uncivil behaviour of human beings due to obscure/ill-defined digital personalities. They may not exhibit such behaviour when they fear societal norms related to a persons' identification.

**Pornographic Content** The pornographic content available on the metaverse may be categorised into two parts: Sexually explicit material and sexually explicit activity. The BBC, in February 2022, reported that anyone older than 13 could enter a strip club in the metaverse through two main routes: VRChat and Roblox, thus exposing children to sexually explicit material. The metaverse also threatens children by exposing them to sexually explicit activity. Furthermore, using an app with a minimum age rating of 13—they visited virtual-reality rooms where avatars were simulating sex and she was shown sex toys and condoms and approached by numerous adult men.

**Reduced Sensitivity and Empathy** Due to the primary nature of interaction in the metaverse being digital, there is a possibility that people may lose or have reduced sensitivity to others when in Metaverse. How can we prevent individuals from being desensitised to violence, racism, and misogyny as they immerse themselves in increasingly realistic virtual worlds? Recently a woman researcher reported rape in the metaverse reporting that her avatar was raped and abused while other users watched after he led her to a private room at a party on the Horizon Worlds platform. Her experience shows a lack of decency and sensitivity from onlookers in the metaverse (Newslanes, 2022).

**Interface Interference** Gray et al. (2018) defines interface-interference as any manipulation of the user interface that privileges specific actions over others, confusing the user or limiting the discoverability of important action possibilities. In the Metaverse, the enhanced intensity of user experience is also likely to accentuate interface interference and thus enhance the scope of manipulation and deception without the user's knowledge (Hong & He, 2021). Key components of interface interference are hidden information, preselection and aesthetic manipulation. The Federal Trade Commission asserts that consumers were charged in the most recent Epic games penalty case even if they were waiting at a loading screen or attempting to restart the game from sleep mode with a single button click. Users allegedly lost hundreds of millions of dollars as a result of these dubious tactics, according to the complaint. According to allegations, Epic disregarded more than a million user complaints, leading many consumers to believe they were being overcharged. The $245 million compensation from Epic will now be utilised to reimburse consumers who suffered financial losses.

### 2.5.2 Conclusion

As the hype around the metaverse continues to grow, it is important to understand and address these issues about the 'dark side'. There are several antecedents of these dark side elements. Firstly, consumers lack the rationality to use metaverse-like platforms more positively. The platform is created to enhance quality interaction, but it may lead to negative experiences if not handled maturely. Secondly, large-scale moderation of content is very difficult. For instance, Facebook deals with three million posts requiring daily moderation, which may lead to confusion, hate crimes, etc. Lastly, the age verification measures are easy to circumvent, thus exposing children to a plethora of harmful content which may be detrimental to their growth. Metaverse was conceptualised to revolutionise how people connect, socialise, and enjoy their leisure time, but like any breakthrough that creates new possibilities, it also makes room for the shadowy aspects of human nature.

## 2.6 A Study of the Potential Dark Sides of the Metaverse in order to Make Immersive Experiences More Secure–¹Sanjar Mohamed AB

The metaverse is the next generation internet—a shift from 2 to 3D ways of consuming information by seamlessly integrating with our physical and virtual lives to create real-time immersive experiences. The development of the metaverse will be bolstered by the advancement and adoption of essential technologies, including 5G communication, extended reality (AR/VR), artificial intelligence, spatial computing, blockchain, and digital twins.

In the metaverse, we will live, connect, play, learn, earn, and work in a fundamentally new way. In essence, the metaverse humanizes technology by allowing humans to interact and perceive the digital world.

In the holistic and democratic vision, the metaverse is a collection of interoperable, decentralized, spatial and persistent immersive virtual worlds that allow people to take control of their data and digital assets. This means people can move their avatars and digital assets such as clothes and collectibles from one virtual world to another.

The metaverse is still in its infancy, and there are many questions and concerns regarding user protection and criminal activities. History has shown humanity that the advent of new technologies will provide new attack vectors for bad actors. Question: Is there much we have learned from history?

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">¹ In this article, the author expresses his opinion and does not represent any organization that the author is associated with.</footnote>
violating incident, occurs about once every seven minutes (Frenkel & Browning, 2021). The metaverse can encourage latent dark/uncivil behaviour of human beings due to obscure/ill-defined digital personalities. They may not exhibit such behaviour when they fear societal norms related to a persons' identification.

**Pornographic Content** The pornographic content available on the metaverse may be categorised into two parts: Sexually explicit material and sexually explicit activity. The BBC, in February 2022, reported that anyone older than 13 could enter a strip club in the metaverse through two main routes: VRChat and Roblox, thus exposing children to sexually explicit material. The metaverse also threatens children by exposing them to sexually explicit activity. Furthermore, using an app with a minimum age rating of 13—they visited virtual-reality rooms where avatars were simulating sex and she was shown sex toys and condoms and approached by numerous adult men.

**Reduced Sensitivity and Empathy** Due to the primary nature of interaction in the metaverse being digital, there is a possibility that people may lose or have reduced sensitivity to others when in Metaverse. How can we prevent individuals from being desensitised to violence, racism, and misogyny as they immerse themselves in increasingly realistic virtual worlds? Recently a woman researcher reported rape in the metaverse reporting that her avatar was raped and abused while other users watched after he led her to a private room at a party on the Horizon Worlds platform. Her experience shows a lack of decency and sensitivity from onlookers in the metaverse (Newslanes, 2022).

**Interface Interference** Gray et al. (2018) defines interface-interference as any manipulation of the user interface that privileges specific actions over others, confusing the user or limiting the discoverability of important action possibilities. In the Metaverse, the enhanced intensity of user experience is also likely to accentuate interface interference and thus enhance the scope of manipulation and deception without the user's knowledge (Hong & He, 2021). Key components of interface interference are hidden information, preselection and aesthetic manipulation. The Federal Trade Commission asserts that consumers were charged in the most recent Epic games penalty case even if they were waiting at a loading screen or attempting to restart the game from sleep mode with a single button click. Users allegedly lost hundreds of millions of dollars as a result of these dubious tactics, according to the complaint. According to allegations, Epic disregarded more than a million user complaints, leading many consumers to believe they were being overcharged. The $245 million compensation from Epic will now be utilised to reimburse consumers who suffered financial losses.

### 2.5.2 Conclusion

As the hype around the metaverse continues to grow, it is important to understand and address these issues about the 'dark side'. There are several antecedents of these dark side elements. Firstly, consumers lack the rationality to use metaverse-like platforms more positively. The platform is created to enhance quality interaction, but it may lead to negative experiences if not handled maturely. Secondly, large-scale moderation of content is very difficult. For instance, Facebook deals with three million posts requiring daily moderation, which may lead to confusion, hate crimes, etc. Lastly, the age verification measures are easy to circumvent, thus exposing children to a plethora of harmful content which may be detrimental to their growth. Metaverse was conceptualised to revolutionise how people connect, socialise, and enjoy their leisure time, but like any breakthrough that creates new possibilities, it also makes room for the shadowy aspects of human nature.

## 2.6 A Study of the Potential Dark Sides of the Metaverse in order to Make Immersive Experiences More Secure–¹Sanjar Mohamed AB

The metaverse is the next generation internet—a shift from 2 to 3D ways of consuming information by seamlessly integrating with our physical and virtual lives to create real-time immersive experiences. The development of the metaverse will be bolstered by the advancement and adoption of essential technologies, including 5G communication, extended reality (AR/VR), artificial intelligence, spatial computing, blockchain, and digital twins.

In the metaverse, we will live, connect, play, learn, earn, and work in a fundamentally new way. In essence, the metaverse humanizes technology by allowing humans to interact and perceive the digital world.

In the holistic and democratic vision, the metaverse is a collection of interoperable, decentralized, spatial and persistent immersive virtual worlds that allow people to take control of their data and digital assets. This means people can move their avatars and digital assets such as clothes and collectibles from one virtual world to another.

The metaverse is still in its infancy, and there are many questions and concerns regarding user protection and criminal activities. History has shown humanity that the advent of new technologies will provide new attack vectors for bad actors. Question: Is there much we have learned from history?

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>

<footnote n="1">¹ In this article, the author expresses his opinion and does not represent any organization that the author is associated with.</footnote>
## 2.6.1 Learning from the Past

The first evolution of the internet has created the dark web. All kinds of criminal activities are carried out on the dark web, such as the sale of weapons, drugs, exploitation of children, and pornography. In the absence of proper guard rails and regulations, the volume, impact, and implications of criminal and illegal activities in the metaverse could be horrendous. By monetizing user attention and data, web2 architecture has also allowed companies to build walled gardens and amass wealth, violating user privacy. In addition, political parties, propagandists, and governments have used social media platforms to spread misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda to manipulate public sentiment and decisions.

Metaverse adoption will only exacerbate the problems of the previous generation of internet and web without government regulation and responsible approaches from organizations. Also, institutional investors and venture capitalists should fund immersive virtual world projects that support sustainable and safe metaverses.

An understanding of the potential problems from a holistic and futuristic perspective is crucial to addressing the issue. As with the early days of the internet, we cannot be sure that all adverse effects of metaverse and cybercrimes will occur in the immersive world. Researching metaverse impact and developing policies to ensure collective ownership is essential to developing a safer metaverse. If proper regulations are not in place, there might be problems in the metaverse.

## 2.6.2 Data Harnessing and Identity Theft

Metaverse users will generate a huge amount of information (big data) when they engage in immersive worlds, especially if they use AR/VR devices. In the metaverse, companies can capture invasive personal information about users through face, eye, haptics, and sensors. Data can include blood pressure, breathing rate, facial expression, vocal inflection, eye movement, body movement, etc. Using more advanced systems such as brain-computer interfaces (BCI), organisations can also collect deeper and thicker data. The metaverse maps detailed biometric information and comprehensive online identities (Big Think, 2022a).

A paper presented by researchers at Meta reveals that when processing from just a few sensors on the head and hands of the user, AI could accurately predict the posture and motion of the user (Winkler et al., 2022). Metaverse identities include avatars, biometrics, spatial information, conscious and unconscious information generated by interaction with platforms. These data can provide insights into an individual's desires and mannerisms. Data extraction and exploitation for invasive marketing or political purposes pose a problem.

What happens if bad actors are able to access a person's geospatial and biometric data? Criminals extract data and steal the identity of the user. By using deep fake technology, criminals can impersonate a particular user without being identified. In the metaverse, identity theft is a major concern.

## 2.6.3 Invasive Advertising, Misinformation and propaganda

Virtual objects can be placed in the metaverse as promotional elements in the natural environment of virtual worlds. Users subconsciously perceive these virtual objects as natural environments, when in reality they are products placed intentionally based on a user's emotional and behavioural profile. A more aggressive marketing strategy would be to place marketing AI avatars within the metaverse. Marketing AI avatars are indistinguishable from other avatars and can interact with users as they would with any other avatar. Marketing AI avatars can personalize the content of marketing in the most persuasive way because they have a complete profile of the user and can't process emotions based on facial expressions and vocal inflections.

Dr Louis Rosenberg, CEO of Unanimous AI, believes that unregulated metaverses will challenge the notion of free will and serve as a weapon of mind control (Big Think, 2022b). A more dangerous scenario is when AI avatars are used to spread propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation. Governments and political parties can aggressively use this. Data can also be used to discriminate against certain races, regions, and religions. By tailoring their message to appeal to the people inclined to their ideologies, terrorists and extremist groups can use the metaverse as a recruiting tool.

## 2.6.4 Phishing

The metaverse can also be used by criminals to conduct phishing attacks. It is a major security concern that bad actors can create metaverse representations of real-world brands and products. It is possible for users to be tricked into giving away their personal information or sending cryptocurrency or tokens to counterfeit brands and products. According to Chainalysis, phishing scams are on the rise in the metaverse (CNBC, 2022a). The Ethereum-based metaverse Decentraland was recently targeted by a phishing scam. Scammers set up fake Decentraland websites. By tricking users into entering their private keys, scammers gained access to the assets and stole cryptocurrency.

## 2.6.5 Financial Crimes and Terrorist Activities

The metaverse can become a hotbed for financial crimes if unmonitored and unregulated (Elliptic Metaverse Report,
## 2.6.1 Learning from the Past

The first evolution of the internet has created the dark web. All kinds of criminal activities are carried out on the dark web, such as the sale of weapons, drugs, exploitation of children, and pornography. In the absence of proper guard rails and regulations, the volume, impact, and implications of criminal and illegal activities in the metaverse could be horrendous. By monetizing user attention and data, web2 architecture has also allowed companies to build walled gardens and amass wealth, violating user privacy. In addition, political parties, propagandists, and governments have used social media platforms to spread misinformation, disinformation, and propaganda to manipulate public sentiment and decisions.

Metaverse adoption will only exacerbate the problems of the previous generation of internet and web without government regulation and responsible approaches from organizations. Also, institutional investors and venture capitalists should fund immersive virtual world projects that support sustainable and safe metaverses.

An understanding of the potential problems from a holistic and futuristic perspective is crucial to addressing the issue. As with the early days of the internet, we cannot be sure that all adverse effects of metaverse and cybercrimes will occur in the immersive world. Researching metaverse impact and developing policies to ensure collective ownership is essential to developing a safer metaverse. If proper regulations are not in place, there might be problems in the metaverse.

## 2.6.2 Data Harnessing and Identity Theft

Metaverse users will generate a huge amount of information (big data) when they engage in immersive worlds, especially if they use AR/VR devices. In the metaverse, companies can capture invasive personal information about users through face, eye, haptics, and sensors. Data can include blood pressure, breathing rate, facial expression, vocal inflection, eye movement, body movement, etc. Using more advanced systems such as brain-computer interfaces (BCI), organisations can also collect deeper and thicker data. The metaverse maps detailed biometric information and comprehensive online identities (Big Think, 2022a).

A paper presented by researchers at Meta reveals that when processing from just a few sensors on the head and hands of the user, AI could accurately predict the posture and motion of the user (Winkler et al., 2022). Metaverse identities include avatars, biometrics, spatial information, conscious and unconscious information generated by interaction with platforms. These data can provide insights into an individual's desires and mannerisms. Data extraction and exploitation for invasive marketing or political purposes pose a problem.

What happens if bad actors are able to access a person's geospatial and biometric data? Criminals extract data and steal the identity of the user. By using deep fake technology, criminals can impersonate a particular user without being identified. In the metaverse, identity theft is a major concern.

## 2.6.3 Invasive Advertising, Misinformation and propaganda

Virtual objects can be placed in the metaverse as promotional elements in the natural environment of virtual worlds. Users subconsciously perceive these virtual objects as natural environments, when in reality they are products placed intentionally based on a user's emotional and behavioural profile. A more aggressive marketing strategy would be to place marketing AI avatars within the metaverse. Marketing AI avatars are indistinguishable from other avatars and can interact with users as they would with any other avatar. Marketing AI avatars can personalize the content of marketing in the most persuasive way because they have a complete profile of the user and can't process emotions based on facial expressions and vocal inflections.

Dr Louis Rosenberg, CEO of Unanimous AI, believes that unregulated metaverses will challenge the notion of free will and serve as a weapon of mind control (Big Think, 2022b). A more dangerous scenario is when AI avatars are used to spread propaganda, misinformation, and disinformation. Governments and political parties can aggressively use this. Data can also be used to discriminate against certain races, regions, and religions. By tailoring their message to appeal to the people inclined to their ideologies, terrorists and extremist groups can use the metaverse as a recruiting tool.

## 2.6.4 Phishing

The metaverse can also be used by criminals to conduct phishing attacks. It is a major security concern that bad actors can create metaverse representations of real-world brands and products. It is possible for users to be tricked into giving away their personal information or sending cryptocurrency or tokens to counterfeit brands and products. According to Chainalysis, phishing scams are on the rise in the metaverse (CNBC, 2022a). The Ethereum-based metaverse Decentraland was recently targeted by a phishing scam. Scammers set up fake Decentraland websites. By tricking users into entering their private keys, scammers gained access to the assets and stole cryptocurrency.

## 2.6.5 Financial Crimes and Terrorist Activities

The metaverse can become a hotbed for financial crimes if unmonitored and unregulated (Elliptic Metaverse Report,
2022). Metaverse platforms use cryptocurrencies and on-chain tokens to make transactions within the metaverse. This means selling and purchasing of digital assets provides opportunities for cross border financial transactions in a manner that is more difficult for the authorities to monitor. Cybercriminals use cryptocurrency to launder money and commit other crimes. Researchers at the National Counter-terrorism Innovation, Technology, and Education Center in Omaha say the metaverse could be used by terrorists as a new domain (Elson et al., 2022). There is a possibility that terrorist groups will use metaverse virtual currencies to make transactions. For these issues to be addressed, international and national law enforcement agencies must work together.

According to Hayward (2022), Epic Games was penalized $520 million by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in December. For alleged "dark patterns" and "billing practices," the FTC is refunding $245 million to affected customers, and they are fined $275 million for violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Children under the age of 13 were collected by the platform without their parents being notified (Hayward, 2022).

### 2.6.6 Abuse of Children, Harassment of Women, and Pornography

Protecting children and women in the metaverse is a priority. A BBC news researcher posing as a 13-year-old, accessed the VRChat platform and was allowed entry to virtual strip clubs and witnessed grooming, sexual material, racist insults and a rape threat in the metaverse like world (BBC, 2022). The researcher was shown sex toys and condoms, and approached by numerous adult men. These incidents show the gravity of sexual attack, exploitation and abuse and children might have to face an unregulated metaverse. When more and more users engage with metaverse, new forms of harassment, abuse and discrimination will emerge. In the Roblox platform, people create sex 'condos' to talk about sex and make their avatars have virtual sex. This definitely goes against the policy of Roblox. In 2007, a woman reported that she was virtually raped—in Second Life (Wired, 2007).

### 2.6.7 Call to Action—Regulations and Responsible management

A group of researchers appointed by the French government has advised leaders to start regulating the metaverse and not repeat the mistakes made with social media (CoinDesk, 2022). There are many challenges associated with policing the metaverse. A growing number of companies and startups are building metaverse worlds. Law enforcement agencies will have a huge task keeping track of all the metaverse

worlds continuously. It is difficult to review the veracity of an incident because every metaverse user will have their own version of events, and interactions do not leave digital footprints as they do on social media. In order to design policies, take proactive measures, and monitor metaverse laws, law enforcement will need highly qualified and specialized personnel.

The metaverse will have stalkers, cybercriminals, abusers, frauds etc. Some of the potential dark themes of the metaverse include identity theft, financial fraud, organised crime, extremist and terrorist activities, human trafficking, pornography, harassment, and sexual assault.

However, the metaverse does not demonize technology, the metaverse will enhance human experiences and connections. It will also change the way we learn and work. The danger lies in how bad actors could use the metaverse for criminal, obscene, and illegal activities. A sustainable metaverse world can be built through proper regulation and coordinated government efforts to build a safe, inclusive, and transparent immersive internet.

## 2.7 The Impact of Metaverses on Social Inclusion and Wellbeing—Savvas Papagiannidis

Over the past two decades, the proliferation of digital technologies has had a significant impact on the business and social environment, leading to the emergence of electronic space and new geography (Li et al., 2010). Metaverses promised to extend the choice users have when it comes to electronic spaces not just quantitatively, but also qualitatively. Free from the burdens of the physical world, metaverses could enhance social inclusion opportunities by opening access to diverse spaces and communities in an immersive manner (Papagiannidis et al., 2008). Digitally transporting users to different worlds is a challenging proposition, though, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. In the physical world, Burchardt et al (1999) consider individuals as socially excluded if they are geographically resident in a society, cannot participate in the normal activities of citizens in that society, and would like to participate, but are prevented from doing so by factors beyond their control. Compared to typical web-based solutions, accessing metaverses can be a more complex process that requires more ICT resources. Similarly to how physical transportation from one space to another may require a car or public transport, entering the metaverse can require specialised hardware and premium services that may not be possible to reuse across metaverses due to interoperability issues. So, access can be an issue before one can actually enter the metaverse. Even if one had access to the resources required and had the skills to operate such devices, wearing headsets for a long period of time can be tiring. Also, unless hardware designs consider more actively diverse groups of users who may have very different accessibility needs, many

<figure><img src="image_10.png" /></figure>
2022). Metaverse platforms use cryptocurrencies and on-chain tokens to make transactions within the metaverse. This means selling and purchasing of digital assets provides opportunities for cross border financial transactions in a manner that is more difficult for the authorities to monitor. Cybercriminals use cryptocurrency to launder money and commit other crimes. Researchers at the National Counter-terrorism Innovation, Technology, and Education Center in Omaha say the metaverse could be used by terrorists as a new domain (Elson et al., 2022). There is a possibility that terrorist groups will use metaverse virtual currencies to make transactions. For these issues to be addressed, international and national law enforcement agencies must work together.

According to Hayward (2022), Epic Games was penalized $520 million by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in December. For alleged "dark patterns" and "billing practices," the FTC is refunding $245 million to affected customers, and they are fined $275 million for violating the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Children under the age of 13 were collected by the platform without their parents being notified (Hayward, 2022).

### 2.6.6 Abuse of Children, Harassment of Women, and Pornography

Protecting children and women in the metaverse is a priority. A BBC news researcher posing as a 13-year-old, accessed the VRChat platform and was allowed entry to virtual strip clubs and witnessed grooming, sexual material, racist insults and a rape threat in the metaverse like world (BBC, 2022). The researcher was shown sex toys and condoms, and approached by numerous adult men. These incidents show the gravity of sexual attack, exploitation and abuse and children might have to face an unregulated metaverse. When more and more users engage with metaverse, new forms of harassment, abuse and discrimination will emerge. In the Roblox platform, people create sex 'condos' to talk about sex and make their avatars have virtual sex. This definitely goes against the policy of Roblox. In 2007, a woman reported that she was virtually raped—in Second Life (Wired, 2007).

### 2.6.7 Call to Action—Regulations and Responsible management

A group of researchers appointed by the French government has advised leaders to start regulating the metaverse and not repeat the mistakes made with social media (CoinDesk, 2022). There are many challenges associated with policing the metaverse. A growing number of companies and startups are building metaverse worlds. Law enforcement agencies will have a huge task keeping track of all the metaverse

worlds continuously. It is difficult to review the veracity of an incident because every metaverse user will have their own version of events, and interactions do not leave digital footprints as they do on social media. In order to design policies, take proactive measures, and monitor metaverse laws, law enforcement will need highly qualified and specialized personnel.

The metaverse will have stalkers, cybercriminals, abusers, frauds etc. Some of the potential dark themes of the metaverse include identity theft, financial fraud, organised crime, extremist and terrorist activities, human trafficking, pornography, harassment, and sexual assault.

However, the metaverse does not demonize technology, the metaverse will enhance human experiences and connections. It will also change the way we learn and work. The danger lies in how bad actors could use the metaverse for criminal, obscene, and illegal activities. A sustainable metaverse world can be built through proper regulation and coordinated government efforts to build a safe, inclusive, and transparent immersive internet.

## 2.7 The Impact of Metaverses on Social Inclusion and Wellbeing—Savvas Papagiannidis

Over the past two decades, the proliferation of digital technologies has had a significant impact on the business and social environment, leading to the emergence of electronic space and new geography (Li et al., 2010). Metaverses promised to extend the choice users have when it comes to electronic spaces not just quantitatively, but also qualitatively. Free from the burdens of the physical world, metaverses could enhance social inclusion opportunities by opening access to diverse spaces and communities in an immersive manner (Papagiannidis et al., 2008). Digitally transporting users to different worlds is a challenging proposition, though, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. In the physical world, Burchardt et al (1999) consider individuals as socially excluded if they are geographically resident in a society, cannot participate in the normal activities of citizens in that society, and would like to participate, but are prevented from doing so by factors beyond their control. Compared to typical web-based solutions, accessing metaverses can be a more complex process that requires more ICT resources. Similarly to how physical transportation from one space to another may require a car or public transport, entering the metaverse can require specialised hardware and premium services that may not be possible to reuse across metaverses due to interoperability issues. So, access can be an issue before one can actually enter the metaverse. Even if one had access to the resources required and had the skills to operate such devices, wearing headsets for a long period of time can be tiring. Also, unless hardware designs consider more actively diverse groups of users who may have very different accessibility needs, many

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>
users could be left out. It is important to consider design-
ing accessible and inclusive technologies that can underpin
immersive environments as they empower users with new
information and experiences without the limitations pertain-
ing to the physical environment (Zallio & Clarkson, 2022). It
is an oxymoron that the technologies and designs that promise
to lift the limitations of the physical environment can impose
obstacles of their own.

In addition to the above, the synchronous and involved nature of interactions in metaverses means that temporal barriers can also limit participation. Social inclusion is not just a matter of overcoming constraints of space, but also overcoming these constraints at particular moments of time so as to gain access to the informal networks of work, leisure, friendship, and family (Cass et al., 2005). This space–time access challenge can be further exacerbated by the limitations that having to use specialised hardware poses. Even if one had such hardware, one could only join a metaverse from the location where the hardware was available. Such “metaverse terminals” may be opening up new worlds, but only from specific physical locations, effectively limiting users. The alternative would be for users to carry such hardware with them, which is likely to be a major inconvenience, if at all possible.

Of course, on one hand it could be argued that hardware
will improve over time and such limitations will be even-
tually addressed. Hardware will also become more afford-
able. Although the above may be true, such developments
are likely to take many years. Providers could focus on early
adopters and create worlds that focus on them as opposed
to the majority of the potential users in the long term. Sim-
ilarly, from the user end, during such a period metaverse
spaces and communities will be shaped only by those who
could actually access them. Those excluded via other chan-
nels, who could have found an alternative inclusion route to
communities and activities of interest, will remain excluded.
Effectively, a technological breakthrough that could have
contributed to reducing exclusion could potentially exac-
erbate existing (or create new forms of) social exclusion
(Andrade & Doolin, 2016). On the other hand one could also
argue that specialised hardware is not always required for
accessing metaverses. In some cases, access can be achieved
by using a web browser on personal computers or via an app
on mobile phones. Such an approach could in fact lower
access barriers. Still, the experience would be radically dif-
ferent. If one were to reverse and push the argument and
consider simpler ways of accessing metaverses that sacrifice
three-dimensional immersion in favour of access and partici-
pation, then why do we need metaverses to start with? One
could use the analogy between having to use a slow versus
vs a fast broadband connection to access the Internet to put
this in perspective. The user can still access the service, but
the experience can be very different.

Considering the above, research will need to revisit adop-
tion and acceptance issues of metaverses from different user
group perspectives, taking into consideration their differ-
ent characteristics and requirements. Such research could
pave the way for understanding factors that impact digital
inclusion and help identify opportunities for tackling new
manifestations of the digital divide and poverty.

When referring to online technologies (such as social
media or online gaming) with regards to wellbeing, discus-
sions often revolve around addiction. This is surprising as
wellbeing, as a broader concept, is not related to the absence
of an undesirable state (Vanden Abeele, 2021). As such it is
important to consider digital wellbeing more widely. To this
end, Vanden Abeele (2021, p. 938) defines digital wellbeing
as “2022, p. 5). Such circumstances are not new, and being
active on social networking sites can have such an impact
on users. Being immersed in metaverses and having direct
interactions that go beyond written forms of abuse can take
things to a completely new level. Metaverses not only inherit
many of the dark side aspects of social media (Baccarella
et al., 2018a subjective individual experience of optimal
balance between the benefits and drawbacks obtained from
[mobile] connectivity. This experiential state is comprised
of affective and cognitive appraisals of the integration of
digital connectivity into ordinary life.” The immersion and
flow that metaverses can develop may make finding a bal-
ance between experiencing maximal controlled pleasure and
functional support, while maintaining control and avoiding
functional impairment, a challenging one. In fact, such a
balance can be easily disrupted by exogenous factors that
are beyond a user’s remit. Unlike most Internet applications
that users have experienced, such as web browsing or shop-
ping online, metaverses are supposed to be social spaces
that encourage direct user-to-user interaction. “The exces-
sive noise, overwhelming information, behavioural, verbal
or visual harassment can lead to a variety of emotions such
as fatigue, depression or embarrassment, which in turn
could lead to a loss of self-confidence or even consequences
of greater impact for the user.” (Zallio & Clarkson, ), but
extend and magnify them.

Given the above, it is important to not just study the
factors that positively and negatively affect digital wellbeing and in turn how this affects a user's overall wellbeing. Such studies could consider different user segments, paying special attention to potentially vulnerable groups.

To make matters worse there are limited ways one can
protect one’s avatar and actual self from such an effect.
User behaviours in metaverses can be difficult to moni-
tor and regulate and consequently there is often little to
prevent users from acting in an offensive manner. Even
defining “anti-social” can be problematic as the ethics
and norms applying in virtual worlds are not necessar-
ily the same as those in the real one (Papagiannidis et al,
users could be left out. It is important to consider design-
ing accessible and inclusive technologies that can underpin
immersive environments as they empower users with new
information and experiences without the limitations pertain-
ing to the physical environment (Zallio & Clarkson, 2022). It
is an oxymoron that the technologies and designs that promise
to lift the limitations of the physical environment can impose
obstacles of their own.

In addition to the above, the synchronous and involved nature of interactions in metaverses means that temporal barriers can also limit participation. Social inclusion is not just a matter of overcoming constraints of space, but also overcoming these constraints at particular moments of time so as to gain access to the informal networks of work, leisure, friendship, and family (Cass et al., 2005). This space–time access challenge can be further exacerbated by the limitations that having to use specialised hardware poses. Even if one had such hardware, one could only join a metaverse from the location where the hardware was available. Such “metaverse terminals” may be opening up new worlds, but only from specific physical locations, effectively limiting users. The alternative would be for users to carry such hardware with them, which is likely to be a major inconvenience, if at all possible.

Of course, on one hand it could be argued that hardware
will improve over time and such limitations will be even-
tually addressed. Hardware will also become more afford-
able. Although the above may be true, such developments
are likely to take many years. Providers could focus on early
adopters and create worlds that focus on them as opposed
to the majority of the potential users in the long term. Sim-
ilarly, from the user end, during such a period metaverse
spaces and communities will be shaped only by those who
could actually access them. Those excluded via other chan-
nels, who could have found an alternative inclusion route to
communities and activities of interest, will remain excluded.
Effectively, a technological breakthrough that could have
contributed to reducing exclusion could potentially exac-
erbate existing (or create new forms of) social exclusion
(Andrade & Doolin, 2016). On the other hand one could also
argue that specialised hardware is not always required for
accessing metaverses. In some cases, access can be achieved
by using a web browser on personal computers or via an app
on mobile phones. Such an approach could in fact lower
access barriers. Still, the experience would be radically dif-
ferent. If one were to reverse and push the argument and
consider simpler ways of accessing metaverses that sacrifice
three-dimensional immersion in favour of access and partici-
pation, then why do we need metaverses to start with? One
could use the analogy between having to use a slow versus
vs a fast broadband connection to access the Internet to put
this in perspective. The user can still access the service, but
the experience can be very different.

Considering the above, research will need to revisit adop-
tion and acceptance issues of metaverses from different user
group perspectives, taking into consideration their differ-
ent characteristics and requirements. Such research could
pave the way for understanding factors that impact digital
inclusion and help identify opportunities for tackling new
manifestations of the digital divide and poverty.

When referring to online technologies (such as social
media or online gaming) with regards to wellbeing, discus-
sions often revolve around addiction. This is surprising as
wellbeing, as a broader concept, is not related to the absence
of an undesirable state (Vanden Abeele, 2021). As such it is
important to consider digital wellbeing more widely. To this
end, Vanden Abeele (2021, p. 938) defines digital wellbeing
as “2022, p. 5). Such circumstances are not new, and being
active on social networking sites can have such an impact
on users. Being immersed in metaverses and having direct
interactions that go beyond written forms of abuse can take
things to a completely new level. Metaverses not only inherit
many of the dark side aspects of social media (Baccarella
et al., 2018a subjective individual experience of optimal
balance between the benefits and drawbacks obtained from
[mobile] connectivity. This experiential state is comprised
of affective and cognitive appraisals of the integration of
digital connectivity into ordinary life.” The immersion and
flow that metaverses can develop may make finding a bal-
ance between experiencing maximal controlled pleasure and
functional support, while maintaining control and avoiding
functional impairment, a challenging one. In fact, such a
balance can be easily disrupted by exogenous factors that
are beyond a user’s remit. Unlike most Internet applications
that users have experienced, such as web browsing or shop-
ping online, metaverses are supposed to be social spaces
that encourage direct user-to-user interaction. “The exces-
sive noise, overwhelming information, behavioural, verbal
or visual harassment can lead to a variety of emotions such
as fatigue, depression or embarrassment, which in turn
could lead to a loss of self-confidence or even consequences
of greater impact for the user.” (Zallio & Clarkson, ), but
extend and magnify them.

Given the above, it is important to not just study the
factors that positively and negatively affect digital wellbeing and in turn how this affects a user's overall wellbeing. Such studies could consider different user segments, paying special attention to potentially vulnerable groups.

To make matters worse there are limited ways one can
protect one’s avatar and actual self from such an effect.
User behaviours in metaverses can be difficult to moni-
tor and regulate and consequently there is often little to
prevent users from acting in an offensive manner. Even
defining “anti-social” can be problematic as the ethics
and norms applying in virtual worlds are not necessar-
ily the same as those in the real one (Papagiannidis et al,
2008). Such behaviour can be detrimental to one's digital
wellbeing and potentially their overall wellbeing. Virtual
worlds may be virtual, but actions in them can have very
real and tangible consequences. This is why it is often
more appropriate to refer to virtual worlds as synthetic
worlds, in order to highlight the fact that these worlds are
products of human actions (Malaby, 2006). Such connec-
tions to the real world should not be treated as an attempt
to stifle freedom of expression and to break the "magic
circle", but as a way of acknowledging that the two need
to exist harmoniously. Castronova (2005, p.147) considers
the boundary between the synthetic world and real one to
be a porous membrane: "2022; Bojic, 2022we find human
society on either side of the membrane, and since society
is the ultimate locus of validation for all of our important
shared notions – value, fact, emotion, meaning – we will
find shared notions on either side as well". Still, on the
synthetic side the rules are created and enforced by the
companies that created the metaverse and have a com-
mercial interest in maintaining it. Whether such interests
are aligned with user interests is open for debate. Social
media platforms are testimony to the challenges companies
and users face when it comes to issues such as freedom of
speech, identity management or harassment. This is not
to say that tech-companies should not seek commercial
success. Quite the contrary. This is important as otherwise
no metaverse could be sustainable. It is a statement of the
need to identify ways in which financial sustainability and
success will not be achieved at the expense of the wellbe-
ing of individuals and communities. Just as it is often the
case that the companies encourage users to co-create by
creating the content they enjoy in metaverses they should
also consider involving them in the governing and shaping
of the worlds themselves, including deciding how porous
the magic circle should be.

Research should pay special attention to consequences
and outcomes that go beyond the metaverse boundaries and
can spill over to real-life.

Preventative measures need to be sought that would make
it possible to proactively act as a first line of user defence
from such behaviours without, though, compromising user
privacy and experience.

## 2.8 Darkside of Metaverse: Mental Health and Wellbeing Perspective – Alexandra Taylor, M. Claudia tom Dieck, and Timothy Jung

2.8.1 Possible Negative Aspects of the Metaverse

Despite its potential benefits, it is essential that research dis-
cusses the potential dark side of the metaverse, regarding
consumer mental wellbeing. Utilising our knowledge per-
taining to older media sources and the technologies involved

within the metaverse, we can begin to explore its poten-
tial detriments. For instance, research has already warned
of the addictive use of the metaverse (Barreda-Angeles &
Hartmann, ); highlighting motivation and psychological
reward as dictating variables responsible for level of addic-
tion (Barreda-Angeles & Hartmann, 2022; Hussain et al.,
2018). Unfortunately, the severity of technological addiction
is often depreciated by society and thus its consequences go
unaddressed (Grajek et al., 2022).

Left unchallenged addiction can instigate negative mood
modification (Barreda-Angeles & Hartmann, 2022). Sim-
ilarly, motivation has been highlighted as a key factor in
determining positive/ negative mood (Javornik et al., 2022).
This is especially true for users who engage in self-indul-
gent escapism, as this can trigger anxiety, depression, and
aggression within a user's objective life (Grajek et al., 2022;
Panova & Lleras, 2016).

Consistent with clinical health, additional evidence
depicts how virtual reality (VR) elicits depersonalisation
and derealisation (DPDR) (Aardema et al., 2010; Peckmann
et al., 2022). As users express feeling detached from their
actions, thoughts, and body, and begin to doubt reality. Per-
sistent DPDR can adversely affect a person's functioning
and is often concurrent alongside depression and anxiety
(Michal et al., 2016; Peckmann et al., 2022). Again, dem-
onstrating how the metaverse can impact a user's objective
mental wellbeing.

Due to the highly social nature of the metaverse, it is also
wise to consider the behaviours of its users. Research reports
increases in anti-social behaviours such as cyberbullying and
harassment (Henz, 2022; Qasem et al., 2022; Wiederhold,
2022a, b). Wiederhold (2022a2022b2017) argues the effects
of which are comparable to real-world incidents; due to VR's
ability to induce real anger and sadness, which is then car-
ried through into the real-world (Kothgassner et al., ).

2.8.2 Future consequences

Due to rapid brain development, children will disproport-
tionately experience the long-term impacts of the metaverse
(Grajek et al., 2022; Kaimara et al., 2021). Predominantly,
these concerns consider the psycho-social aspects of well-
being; relating to addiction, anti-social behaviours, isola-
tion, and emotional development (Kaimara et al., 2021).
Already there is evidence of increased ADHD (Attention
Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder)-like behaviours manifesting
in young metaverse users, demonstrating the metaverse's
influence on childhood development (Steve & Grubb, 2018).

Moreover, overuse of these technologies reason appre-
hension relating to a potential increase of isolative behav-
iours (Kaimara et al., 2021). As the metaverse expands we
will see less human-to-human connection and more human-
to-artificial intelligence (AI) connection (Henz, 2022). This

<figure><img src="image_11.png" /></figure>
2008). Such behaviour can be detrimental to one's digital
wellbeing and potentially their overall wellbeing. Virtual
worlds may be virtual, but actions in them can have very
real and tangible consequences. This is why it is often
more appropriate to refer to virtual worlds as synthetic
worlds, in order to highlight the fact that these worlds are
products of human actions (Malaby, 2006). Such connec-
tions to the real world should not be treated as an attempt
to stifle freedom of expression and to break the "magic
circle", but as a way of acknowledging that the two need
to exist harmoniously. Castronova (2005, p.147) considers
the boundary between the synthetic world and real one to
be a porous membrane: "2022; Bojic, 2022we find human
society on either side of the membrane, and since society
is the ultimate locus of validation for all of our important
shared notions – value, fact, emotion, meaning – we will
find shared notions on either side as well". Still, on the
synthetic side the rules are created and enforced by the
companies that created the metaverse and have a com-
mercial interest in maintaining it. Whether such interests
are aligned with user interests is open for debate. Social
media platforms are testimony to the challenges companies
and users face when it comes to issues such as freedom of
speech, identity management or harassment. This is not
to say that tech-companies should not seek commercial
success. Quite the contrary. This is important as otherwise
no metaverse could be sustainable. It is a statement of the
need to identify ways in which financial sustainability and
success will not be achieved at the expense of the wellbe-
ing of individuals and communities. Just as it is often the
case that the companies encourage users to co-create by
creating the content they enjoy in metaverses they should
also consider involving them in the governing and shaping
of the worlds themselves, including deciding how porous
the magic circle should be.

Research should pay special attention to consequences
and outcomes that go beyond the metaverse boundaries and
can spill over to real-life.

Preventative measures need to be sought that would make it possible to proactively act as a first line of user defence from such behaviours without, though, compromising user privacy and experience.

## 2.8 Darkside of Metaverse: Mental Health and Wellbeing Perspective – Alexandra Taylor, M. Claudia tom Dieck, and Timothy Jung

2.8.1 Possible Negative Aspects of the Metaverse

Despite its potential benefits, it is essential that research dis-
cusses the potential dark side of the metaverse, regarding
consumer mental wellbeing. Utilising our knowledge per-
taining to older media sources and the technologies involved

within the metaverse, we can begin to explore its poten-
tial detriments. For instance, research has already warned
of the addictive use of the metaverse (Barreda-Angeles &
Hartmann, ); highlighting motivation and psychological
reward as dictating variables responsible for level of addic-
tion (Barreda-Angeles & Hartmann, 2022; Hussain et al.,
2018). Unfortunately, the severity of technological addiction
is often depreciated by society and thus its consequences go
unaddressed (Grajek et al., 2022).

Left unchallenged addiction can instigate negative mood
modification (Barreda-Angeles & Hartmann, 2022). Sim-
ilarly, motivation has been highlighted as a key factor in
determining positive/ negative mood (Javornik et al., 2022).
This is especially true for users who engage in self-indul-
gent escapism, as this can trigger anxiety, depression, and
aggression within a user's objective life (Grajek et al., 2022;
Panova & Lleras, 2016).

Consistent with clinical health, additional evidence
depicts how virtual reality (VR) elicits depersonalisation
and derealisation (DPDR) (Aardema et al., 2010; Peckmann
et al., 2022). As users express feeling detached from their
actions, thoughts, and body, and begin to doubt reality. Per-
sistent DPDR can adversely affect a person's functioning
and is often concurrent alongside depression and anxiety
(Michal et al., 2016; Peckmann et al., 2022). Again, dem-
onstrating how the metaverse can impact a user's objective
mental wellbeing.

Due to the highly social nature of the metaverse, it is also
wise to consider the behaviours of its users. Research reports
increases in anti-social behaviours such as cyberbullying and
harassment (Henz, 2022; Qasem et al., 2022; Wiederhold,
2022a, b). Wiederhold (2022a2022b2017) argues the effects
of which are comparable to real-world incidents; due to VR's
ability to induce real anger and sadness, which is then car-
ried through into the real-world (Kothgassner et al., ).

2.8.2 Future consequences

Due to rapid brain development, children will disproport-
tionately experience the long-term impacts of the metaverse
(Grajek et al., 2022; Kaimara et al., 2021). Predominantly,
these concerns consider the psycho-social aspects of well-
being; relating to addiction, anti-social behaviours, isola-
tion, and emotional development (Kaimara et al., 2021).
Already there is evidence of increased ADHD (Attention
Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder)-like behaviours manifesting
in young metaverse users, demonstrating the metaverse's
influence on childhood development (Steve & Grubb, 2018).

Moreover, overuse of these technologies reason appre-
hension relating to a potential increase of isolative behav-
iours (Kaimara et al., 2021). As the metaverse expands we
will see less human-to-human connection and more human-
to-artificial intelligence (AI) connection (Henz, 2022). This

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>
phenomenon will propose a new form of loneliness as the introduction of AI risks alienating consumers (Putoni et al., 2020).

Simultaneously, the introduction of AI within the metaverse will allow easier access to user-related information (Henz, 2022). The more information accessed via AI; the more consumers will become vulnerable to the manipulation by the organisations attaining their information (Henz, 2022). These manipulations will limit self-control over mental experiences and behaviour, thus wellbeing (Yaden et al., 2018).

Despite increased accessibility to certain services provide by VR, the technology alone remains costly to develop and purchase (Yaden et al., 2018). Thus, the metaverse, is more acquirable for affluent populations, than those faced with economic inequalities (Riches et al., 2021; Usmani et al., 2022a, b). This chances the perpetuation of the socio-economic digital divide and thus the social exclusion and discrimination of certain demographics (i.e. the elderly) (Yaden et al., 2018). Consequently, these demographics will forgo any wellbeing-related benefits provided via the metaverse (Usmani et al., 2022a, b).

## 2.8.3 Mitigation-Strategies

As the metaverse expands, it is important that stakeholders and researchers recognise and educate themselves of its associated risks and benefits (Wiederhold, 2022a, b; Yaden et al., 2018). Acquiring the knowledge and advice of health-care professionals will ensure policy and guidelines are ethically developed in accordance with consumer wellbeing (Wiederhold, 2022a, b; Yaden et al., 2018).

Adopting professional perspectives will additionally inform the governance of the metaverse and subsequently its users. Governance will help mitigate anti-social behaviours such as racism, discrimination, and bullying (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). *Governance by the metaverse* will ensure adherence to terms of service, by holding users accountable for their behaviour—thus incentivising positive socialisation among its users (2022a).

Preliminary evidence indicates that duration of use and feelings of embodiment are predictive of unfavourable addictive behaviours (Barreda-Angeles & Hartmann, 2022). Therefore, to safeguard consumer mental health and minimise the risk of addiction, derealisation, and social isolation, policy should propose time limits.

Additionally, developers should aim to limit interference of the digital divide by standardising technological cost and its provision. In terms of wellbeing service, the metaverse should be treated no differently than existing resources (Yaden et al., 2018). Furthermore, vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, could benefit from educative VR sessions, which aim to minimise technology discrimination by overcoming usage and knowledge gaps (Li et al., 2021).

## 2.8.4 Research Agendas

Further research is necessary to strengthen the validity of novel insights currently available regarding the dark side of the metaverse (Wiederhold, 2022a, b). Previous literature highlighted the benefits of collaborating the perspectives of users, researchers, and professionals in ensuring ethical development (Wiederhold, 2022a, b; Yaden et al., 2018); this could be attained via a human-centred design (Fernandez & Hui, 2022). Currently, however, there is a lack of sufficient supporting evidence for this approach; thus, research should investigate the practicality in the development of a safe and ethical metaverse—which promotes consumer wellbeing.

The novelty of the metaverse means that minimal research is available which depicts the likelihood of negative risks associated with its use. Thus, justifying further investigation into the dark side of the metaverse; by expanding established knowledge regarding the overuse of existing medias such as internet addiction, depression, anxiety, social isolation (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). Findings will allow policy makers to prioritise guidelines in correspondence to the most prevalent risk factors associated with user wellbeing.

As illustrated previously, misconduct within virtual worlds can impact the mental wellbeing of those targeted (Kothgassner et al., 2017; Wiederhold, 2022a, b). This therefore amplifies the need for proper regulation and governance of the metaverse as suggested by Dwivedi et al. (2022a). However, imminent research needs to establish the feasibility of governing the metaverse and how this will be affected by differing local laws (Fernandez & Hui, 2022).

## 2.9 Sexual Harassment in the metaverse: Will Extended Reality exacerbate toxicity online?— Animesh Jain & Richard Foster-Fletcher

XR refers to environments that combine the real and the virtual. VR, AR and mixed reality (MR) are all examples of this. This technology, while constantly evolving, is not necessarily new, nor are the opportunities and risks that come with it. When done correctly, XR can push reality to its limits, resulting in new experiences that, while artificial, fuel real and lasting memories. New XR developments make our virtual worlds more immersive. Furthermore, remarkable technologies make metaverse spaces feel more and more natural. Unfortunately, it's not just the surroundings that feel authentic; it's also the experiences. As a result, emotional reactions intensify in XR environments and can elicit the same internal nervous system and psychological responses as unpleasant real-life interactions. At first glance, XR may appear to be your typical sci-fi innovation, and it's easy to get caught up in the novelty. However, the true impact of these experiences is determined by how they make people feel. This makes them both valuable and dangerous because
phenomenon will propose a new form of loneliness as the introduction of AI risks alienating consumers (Putoni et al., 2020).

Simultaneously, the introduction of AI within the metaverse will allow easier access to user-related information (Henz, 2022). The more information accessed via AI; the more consumers will become vulnerable to the manipulation by the organisations attaining their information (Henz, 2022). These manipulations will limit self-control over mental experiences and behaviour, thus wellbeing (Yaden et al., 2018).

Despite increased accessibility to certain services provide by VR, the technology alone remains costly to develop and purchase (Yaden et al., 2018). Thus, the metaverse, is more acquirable for affluent populations, than those faced with economic inequalities (Riches et al., 2021; Usmani et al., 2022a, b). This chances the perpetuation of the socio-economic digital divide and thus the social exclusion and discrimination of certain demographics (i.e. the elderly) (Yaden et al., 2018). Consequently, these demographics will forgo any wellbeing-related benefits provided via the metaverse (Usmani et al., 2022a, b).

## 2.8.3 Mitigation-Strategies

As the metaverse expands, it is important that stakeholders and researchers recognise and educate themselves of its associated risks and benefits (Wiederhold, 2022a, b; Yaden et al., 2018). Acquiring the knowledge and advice of health-care professionals will ensure policy and guidelines are ethically developed in accordance with consumer wellbeing (Wiederhold, 2022a, b; Yaden et al., 2018).

Adopting professional perspectives will additionally inform the governance of the metaverse and subsequently its users. Governance will help mitigate anti-social behaviours such as racism, discrimination, and bullying (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). *Governance by the metaverse* will ensure adherence to terms of service, by holding users accountable for their behaviour—thus incentivising positive socialisation among its users (2022a).

Preliminary evidence indicates that duration of use and feelings of embodiment are predictive of unfavourable addictive behaviours (Barreda-Angeles & Hartmann, 2022). Therefore, to safeguard consumer mental health and minimise the risk of addiction, derealisation, and social isolation, policy should propose time limits.

Additionally, developers should aim to limit interference of the digital divide by standardising technological cost and its provision. In terms of wellbeing service, the metaverse should be treated no differently than existing resources (Yaden et al., 2018). Furthermore, vulnerable groups, such as the elderly, could benefit from educative VR sessions, which aim to minimise technology discrimination by overcoming usage and knowledge gaps (Li et al., 2021).

## 2.8.4 Research Agendas

Further research is necessary to strengthen the validity of novel insights currently available regarding the dark side of the metaverse (Wiederhold, 2022a, b). Previous literature highlighted the benefits of collaborating the perspectives of users, researchers, and professionals in ensuring ethical development (Wiederhold, 2022a, b; Yaden et al., 2018); this could be attained via a human-centred design (Fernandez & Hui, 2022). Currently, however, there is a lack of sufficient supporting evidence for this approach; thus, research should investigate the practicality in the development of a safe and ethical metaverse—which promotes consumer wellbeing.

The novelty of the metaverse means that minimal research is available which depicts the likelihood of negative risks associated with its use. Thus, justifying further investigation into the dark side of the metaverse; by expanding established knowledge regarding the overuse of existing medias such as internet addiction, depression, anxiety, social isolation (Dwivedi et al., 2022a). Findings will allow policy makers to prioritise guidelines in correspondence to the most prevalent risk factors associated with user wellbeing.

As illustrated previously, misconduct within virtual worlds can impact the mental wellbeing of those targeted (Kothgassner et al., 2017; Wiederhold, 2022a, b). This therefore amplifies the need for proper regulation and governance of the metaverse as suggested by Dwivedi et al. (2022a). However, imminent research needs to establish the feasibility of governing the metaverse and how this will be affected by differing local laws (Fernandez & Hui, 2022).

## 2.9 Sexual Harassment in the metaverse: Will Extended Reality exacerbate toxicity online?— Animesh Jain & Richard Foster-Fletcher

XR refers to environments that combine the real and the virtual. VR, AR and mixed reality (MR) are all examples of this. This technology, while constantly evolving, is not necessarily new, nor are the opportunities and risks that come with it. When done correctly, XR can push reality to its limits, resulting in new experiences that, while artificial, fuel real and lasting memories. New XR developments make our virtual worlds more immersive. Furthermore, remarkable technologies make metaverse spaces feel more and more natural. Unfortunately, it's not just the surroundings that feel authentic; it's also the experiences. As a result, emotional reactions intensify in XR environments and can elicit the same internal nervous system and psychological responses as unpleasant real-life interactions. At first glance, XR may appear to be your typical sci-fi innovation, and it's easy to get caught up in the novelty. However, the true impact of these experiences is determined by how they make people feel. This makes them both valuable and dangerous because
there are few rules, and it's hard to police these platforms effectively. By highlighting the issue of harassment in the metaverse, we will attempt to understand how the metaverse has the potential to exacerbate toxicity online.

## 2.9.1 XR Development to Elicit Emotions and Cases of Sexual Harassment

Organisations already use immersive technology to elicit emotion and motivate millions of people to take action and are investigating more ways to use VR's immersive technology to extend this further, highlighting the criticality in investigating what emotional reactions are experienced. The research by Durnell (2018) used the appraisal theory of emotion for interpreting the subject's emotional reactions, its sentiment and thematic analysis showed (a) an increase in empathy, (b) reports of emotional reactions, such as sadness, grief, and anger, (c) a better understanding of the crisis, (d) intentions to act in response to the crisis, (e) the importance of VR for educational use, and (f) the power of VR and its ability to change fields such as education, humanitarian work, and politics. According to this study, the immersive experience of viewing a crisis in VR elicits a wide range of highly emotional reactions. Studies have shown that more immersive VR settings had a more significant effect on fear and anxiety (Juan & Pérez, 2009) than on happiness and relaxation (Baños et al., 2008). Understanding the role of VR in eliciting emotional reactions and behavioural change is an important goal, especially given the rapid development of emotional VR content and people's access to immersive technology. VR is significantly more psychologically potent than other media due to the high levels of immersion and users tend to treat the VR experience at a cognitive level, as a real physical interaction.

For as long as there has been technology, there has also been the potential for its misuse. However, VR design makes it more difficult to escape the effects of cyberbullying. According to the research in Blackwell et al. (2019), "in VR, users are embodied in avatars that move when the player moves and interact with other players in 3D spaces, enabling violations of personal space and corporeal presence that feel fundamentally different than interactions that occur in other online environments—an experience made potentially more salient by the unique sensation of the presence or the feeling of truly *being there*. As a result, the embodiment and presence in VR intensify harassment." This feature of a virtual avatar in VR allows for the possibility of committing and experiencing virtual groping (Basu, 2021) and even rape (Smith, 2022), which was not possible in previous generations of online services or 2D spaces such as Instagram. Harassment can be exacerbated in immersive environments by features such as synchronous voice chat, increased feelings of presence and embodiment, and avatar

movements that can feel like invasions of personal space (such as simulated touching or grabbing). Harassment and bullying may become more traumatising while protecting privacy will become even more important as data about an individual's digital location, emotional state, or behaviour becomes more accessible. Early reports of sexual harassment in virtual spaces highlight the critical need for proactive governance and regulation, particularly to protect vulnerable groups including children and protect their psychological well-being.

## 2.9.2 Governing the Metaverse

Harassment is common on the internet today, but being in the Metaverse can amplify it. Early indications from research and reports suggest that the technology companies in the space have a lot of work to do if they want to make the Metaverse a safer place for users than social media. As a result, this issue requires immediate attention. However, an important question remains: can a sexual harassment encounter in virtual reality be compared to one in the physical world?

In the real world, some people may sexually harass strangers and indecently expose themselves; the same is true in the metaverse. Indeed, this is more likely to occur precisely because legal authorities will find it difficult to hold them accountable. While criminals can use cyberspace to inflict harm and thus escape the constraints of the physical world, the ends they seek and the injuries they inflict remain grounded in physical reality. In VR, sexual harassment can be perpetrated in far more ways than was previously possible on traditional online platforms. There have been numerous reports of virtual groping and virtual rape. Federal prosecutors in Belgium (Wired, 2007) asked the Belgian Federal Computer Crime Unit to travel to the scene of a crime in the Second Life platform to investigate a "virtual rape" involving a Belgian victim. The reaction of Belgian police to a reported virtual rape suggests that such an experience is traumatic. As a result, it is critical to discuss the existing remedies for dealing with these new-age crimes. Accountability in virtual space becomes more challenging to define. Thus the availability of this new conceptual vector for human activity is not without flaws and has the potential to open Pandora's box of legal challenges. If much can be accomplished with images such as revenge porn, imagine what a sentient, 3-D avatar with a reach of billions of people could accomplish.

The distributed landscape of virtual reality applications and the dynamic nature of local community norms complicate efforts to govern these developing spaces. Authorities must better understand this nascent social and psychological environment in terms of harassment, abuse, and discomfort in social VR. Users' definitions of what constitutes online harassment are subjective and highly

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /></figure>
there are few rules, and it's hard to police these platforms effectively. By highlighting the issue of harassment in the metaverse, we will attempt to understand how the metaverse has the potential to exacerbate toxicity online.

## 2.9.1 XR Development to Elicit Emotions and Cases of Sexual Harassment

Organisations already use immersive technology to elicit emotion and motivate millions of people to take action and are investigating more ways to use VR's immersive technology to extend this further, highlighting the criticality in investigating what emotional reactions are experienced. The research by Durnell (2018) used the appraisal theory of emotion for interpreting the subject's emotional reactions, its sentiment and thematic analysis showed (a) an increase in empathy, (b) reports of emotional reactions, such as sadness, grief, and anger, (c) a better understanding of the crisis, (d) intentions to act in response to the crisis, (e) the importance of VR for educational use, and (f) the power of VR and its ability to change fields such as education, humanitarian work, and politics. According to this study, the immersive experience of viewing a crisis in VR elicits a wide range of highly emotional reactions. Studies have shown that more immersive VR settings had a more significant effect on fear and anxiety (Juan & Pérez, 2009) than on happiness and relaxation (Baños et al., 2008). Understanding the role of VR in eliciting emotional reactions and behavioural change is an important goal, especially given the rapid development of emotional VR content and people's access to immersive technology. VR is significantly more psychologically potent than other media due to the high levels of immersion and users tend to treat the VR experience at a cognitive level, as a real physical interaction.

For as long as there has been technology, there has also been the potential for its misuse. However, VR design makes it more difficult to escape the effects of cyberbullying. According to the research in Blackwell et al. (2019), "in VR, users are embodied in avatars that move when the player moves and interact with other players in 3D spaces, enabling violations of personal space and corporeal presence that feel fundamentally different than interactions that occur in other online environments—an experience made potentially more salient by the unique sensation of the presence or the feeling of truly *being there*. As a result, the embodiment and presence in VR intensify harassment." This feature of a virtual avatar in VR allows for the possibility of committing and experiencing virtual groping (Basu, 2021) and even rape (Smith, 2022), which was not possible in previous generations of online services or 2D spaces such as Instagram. Harassment can be exacerbated in immersive environments by features such as synchronous voice chat, increased feelings of presence and embodiment, and avatar

movements that can feel like invasions of personal space (such as simulated touching or grabbing). Harassment and bullying may become more traumatising while protecting privacy will become even more important as data about an individual's digital location, emotional state, or behaviour becomes more accessible. Early reports of sexual harassment in virtual spaces highlight the critical need for proactive governance and regulation, particularly to protect vulnerable groups including children and protect their psychological well-being.

## 2.9.2 Governing the Metaverse

Harassment is common on the internet today, but being in the Metaverse can amplify it. Early indications from research and reports suggest that the technology companies in the space have a lot of work to do if they want to make the Metaverse a safer place for users than social media. As a result, this issue requires immediate attention. However, an important question remains: can a sexual harassment encounter in virtual reality be compared to one in the physical world?

In the real world, some people may sexually harass strangers and indecently expose themselves; the same is true in the metaverse. Indeed, this is more likely to occur precisely because legal authorities will find it difficult to hold them accountable. While criminals can use cyberspace to inflict harm and thus escape the constraints of the physical world, the ends they seek and the injuries they inflict remain grounded in physical reality. In VR, sexual harassment can be perpetrated in far more ways than was previously possible on traditional online platforms. There have been numerous reports of virtual groping and virtual rape. Federal prosecutors in Belgium (Wired, 2007) asked the Belgian Federal Computer Crime Unit to travel to the scene of a crime in the Second Life platform to investigate a "virtual rape" involving a Belgian victim. The reaction of Belgian police to a reported virtual rape suggests that such an experience is traumatic. As a result, it is critical to discuss the existing remedies for dealing with these new-age crimes. Accountability in virtual space becomes more challenging to define. Thus the availability of this new conceptual vector for human activity is not without flaws and has the potential to open Pandora's box of legal challenges. If much can be accomplished with images such as revenge porn, imagine what a sentient, 3-D avatar with a reach of billions of people could accomplish.

The distributed landscape of virtual reality applications and the dynamic nature of local community norms complicate efforts to govern these developing spaces. Authorities must better understand this nascent social and psychological environment in terms of harassment, abuse, and discomfort in social VR. Users' definitions of what constitutes online harassment are subjective and highly

<figure><img src="image_13.png" /></figure>