reaction speed is in line with our [45,51] and other previous studies [34,56,57]. Additionally, the current and previous findings thus offer robust evidence that cybersickness substantially compromised psychomotor skills. However, experience with playing videogames was also included in the best model, where a significant positive effect on reaction time (i.e., acceleration of reaction speed) was detected. This finding aligns with the previous literature pertaining to the effects of gaming experience on psychomotor speed [122–125]. In the context of cybersickness, this outcome indicates that the gaming experience has to be considered (e.g., as a covariate) to effectively examine the effects of cybersickness on psychomotor skills.

While the effects on overall reaction speed are well established by the current and previous findings, the cybersickness's effects on the components of psychomotor skills (i.e., attentional and motor speed) still need to be investigated in depth. In this study, the attentional speed was found to be significantly decelerated by the oculomotor symptoms' intensity. This outcome is in agreement with previous studies that revealed a significant negative effect on attentional processing speed [56,58]. However, these previous studies attributed the deceleration of attentional speed to overall cybersickness. In the current study, while both overall cybersickness intensity and the oculomotor symptoms' intensity were deemed significant predictors of attentional speed, only the oculomotor symptomatology was incorporated in the respective best model. This outcome is in line with the established understanding that the oculomotor system is essential for facilitating visual attention functioning, especially for orienting attention [126,127]. Hence, our findings connote that a transient dysfunction of the oculomotor system (e.g., eye fatigue or strain) substantially compromises attentional speed.

However, the deceleration of the motor speed was found to be predominantly attributed to nausea symptomatology. This finding is aligned with the current understanding of the negative effects of nausea on motor coordination and skills due to a modulation of the activation of sensorimotor brain regions [128,129]. Nevertheless, gaming experience was also included in the best predictive model of motor speed, where a significant acceleration of motor speed was observed due to more gaming experience. This aligns with the relevant literature that postulates that gaming experience promotes an enhanced motor speed, especially for fine motor functions [130,131]. Thus, this finding suggests that gaming experience should be considered in the examination of cybersickness effects on motor speed. In summary, gaming experience appears central to enhancing psychomotor speed, while cybersickness substantially decelerates overall reaction speed. Regarding the components of psychomotor skills, the intensity of oculomotor and nausea symptoms significantly decelerates attentional and motor speed, respectively.

## 5.7. Cybersickness Symptoms and Their Intensity during and after Immersion

The intensities of overall cybersickness, nausea symptoms, and vestibular symptoms were substantially decreased after immersion (i.e., immediately after removing the headset). However, oculomotor symptoms did not decrease, which suggests that they may have a more lasting impact. This appears to be similar to simulator sickness, where oculomotor symptoms like eye strain persist long after the exposure to the simulator [132]. In contrast, vestibular and nausea symptoms are the most frequent and predominant in cybersickness [29,71,133]. Thus, these findings draw a stark contrast between the experience of cybersickness during immersion in a virtual environment and after immersion. This agrees with the suggestion that the human body and mind strive to readjust to the physical environment immediately after the removal of the VR headset [59].

Based on our results, after the exposure to stimuli inducing cybersickness, and during this transitory period of readapting to the physical space and body, the cybersickness's intensity and symptoms substantially fade away. This also agrees with the current predominant understanding that cybersickness symptoms and effects are transient [44]. However, there is no consensus concerning how long cybersickness symptoms may persist, with some previous reviews suggesting that they may last for up to 12 h after exposure to VR [31,134].
However, our results suggest that the period of experiencing a substantial alleviation of cybersickness intensity commences during immersion (i.e., after exposure to stimuli inducing cybersickness, such as linear and angular accelerations) and that users attained a significant decrease after immersion, during their readaptation to the physical body and environment. Hence, this natural process counteracts or alleviates some of the dissonances experienced in the virtual environment during immersion. However, the cybersickness was measured after the ride (i.e., not during the exposure to the stimuli inducing vection and cybersickness), and not during the ride, which allows room for further research.

Nevertheless, our findings posit fundamental ramifications for the methodology used in VR research on cybersickness. To the best of our knowledge, except for the current and our previous studies [45,51], the studies on cybersickness (e.g., [28,39–41,43,68]) or cybersickness’s effects on human physiology or cognitive functioning or psychomotor skills (e.g., [34,50,56–58,72,73,133]) measure cybersickness’s intensity, symptomatology, and/or its effects, after immersion. Our findings indicate that this approach may only capture a part of the overall picture, or even worse, a substantially distorted picture.

If cybersickness symptoms subside or change in intensity immediately after VR ex-
posure, then solely post-immersion evaluations could lead to unreliable conclusions. For
instance, evaluations performed post immersion might underestimate the true intensity of
the symptoms experienced during VR exposure, as well as the effects of cybersickness on
cognition and motor skills. From a research design standpoint, these insights underscore
the importance of adopting a more temporally accurate approach. Hence, in studies at-
tempting to attain a holistic view of cybersickness, researchers should endeavour to capture
data at multiple points—before, during, and after VR exposure. On the other hand, studies
attempting to examine cybersickness aftereffects or the persistence of symptomatology may
perform their examination after immersion. Lastly, it is crucial for studies striving to assess
cybersickness’s intensity and symptomatology, as well as its effects on physiology (e.g.,
autonomic responses such as heart rate and temperature), cognition, and motor skills, to
perform their examination during the VR immersion.

5.8. *Limitations and Future Studies*

This study also has some limitations that should be considered. While allowing for the
conduction of the required statistical analyses, the sample size was relatively small. Also,
the sample consisted predominantly of young adults aged 20–45 years old. A future study
should incorporate a larger and/or more age-diverse sample (e.g., considering adolescents
and/or older adults). Moreover, this study utilized the MSSQ and did not consider the
VIMSSQ, which is specific to the vection elicited by screen-based mediums. Using both in a
future study may assist in deciphering whether generic motion sickness susceptibility or
a susceptibility that is specific to vection is an indicator for experiencing cybersickness’s
symptomatology and intensity. Also, overall gaming experience was used for investigating
gaming experience’s effects on cybersickness, cognitive functioning, and psychomotor
skills. Since each genre of videogames offers diverse content that may stimulate distinct
physiological and cognitive aspects, future studies should attempt to examine the effects of
gaming experience by genre.

Moreover, this study explored the cybersickness intensity and symptoms in VR that were induced by vection. While vection is indeed one of the main reasons for cybersickness, several factors (e.g., low latency or latency fluctuations, non-ergonomic navigation, and low-quality graphics) may induce cybersickness. Future research should explore the intensity and symptomatology of cybersickness induced by each factor. The current study included several cognitive and psychomotor tasks. Given that a task's characteristics may modulate cybersickness [135], future studies should either consider a single task or examine each task's effects on cybersickness. Finally, considering that significant differences were found during and post immersion, future attempts should consider multiple assessment points of cybersickness to effectively scrutinize the cybersickness's symptoms and intensity before, during (i.e., with several assessments), and after immersion.
However, our results suggest that the period of experiencing a substantial alleviation of cybersickness intensity commences during immersion (i.e., after exposure to stimuli inducing cybersickness, such as linear and angular accelerations) and that users attained a significant decrease after immersion, during their readaptation to the physical body and environment. Hence, this natural process counteracts or alleviates some of the dissonances experienced in the virtual environment during immersion. However, the cybersickness was measured after the ride (i.e., not during the exposure to the stimuli inducing vection and cybersickness), and not during the ride, which allows room for further research.

Nevertheless, our findings posit fundamental ramifications for the methodology used in VR research on cybersickness. To the best of our knowledge, except for the current and our previous studies [45,51], the studies on cybersickness (e.g., [28,39–41,43,68]) or cybersickness’s effects on human physiology or cognitive functioning or psychomotor skills (e.g., [34,50,56–58,72,73,133]) measure cybersickness’s intensity, symptomatology, and/or its effects, after immersion. Our findings indicate that this approach may only capture a part of the overall picture, or even worse, a substantially distorted picture.

If cybersickness symptoms subside or change in intensity immediately after VR exposure, then solely post-immersion evaluations could lead to unreliable conclusions. For instance, evaluations performed post immersion might underestimate the true intensity of the symptoms experienced during VR exposure, as well as the effects of cybersickness on cognition and motor skills. From a research design standpoint, these insights underscore the importance of adopting a more temporally accurate approach. Hence, in studies attempting to attain a holistic view of cybersickness, researchers should endeavour to capture data at multiple points—before, during, and after VR exposure. On the other hand, studies attempting to examine cybersickness aftereffects or the persistence of symptomatology may perform their examination after immersion. Lastly, it is crucial for studies striving to assess cybersickness’s intensity and symptomatology, as well as its effects on physiology (e.g., autonomic responses such as heart rate and temperature), cognition, and motor skills, to perform their examination during the VR immersion.

## 5.8. Limitations and Future Studies

This study also has some limitations that should be considered. While allowing for the conduction of the required statistical analyses, the sample size was relatively small. Also, the sample consisted predominantly of young adults aged 20–45 years old. A future study should incorporate a larger and/or more age-diverse sample (e.g., considering adolescents and/or older adults). Moreover, this study utilized the MSSQ and did not consider the VIMSSQ, which is specific to the vection elicited by screen-based mediums. Using both in a future study may assist in deciphering whether generic motion sickness susceptibility or a susceptibility that is specific to vection is an indicator for experiencing cybersickness’s symptomatology and intensity. Also, overall gaming experience was used for investigating gaming experience’s effects on cybersickness, cognitive functioning, and psychomotor skills. Since each genre of videogames offers diverse content that may stimulate distinct physiological and cognitive aspects, future studies should attempt to examine the effects of gaming experience by genre.

Moreover, this study explored the cybersickness intensity and symptoms in VR that were induced by vection. While vection is indeed one of the main reasons for cybersickness, several factors (e.g., low latency or latency fluctuations, non-ergonomic navigation, and low-quality graphics) may induce cybersickness. Future research should explore the intensity and symptomatology of cybersickness induced by each factor. The current study included several cognitive and psychomotor tasks. Given that a task’s characteristics may modulate cybersickness [135], future studies should either consider a single task or examine each task’s effects on cybersickness. Finally, considering that significant differences were found during and post immersion, future attempts should consider multiple assessment points of cybersickness to effectively scrutinize the cybersickness’s symptoms and intensity before, during (i.e., with several assessments), and after immersion.
**6. Conclusions**

This study comprehensively explored the modulators, symptomatology, and effects of cybersickness on an array of cognitive, physiological, and psychomotor functions. Notably, in line with our previous studies [45,51], it was found that pupil dilation was a valuable biomarker for cybersickness, reflecting the intensity of the experienced symptoms. Interestingly, demographic factors like sex and age did not significantly predict cybersickness. However, experience with videogames and smartphones emerged as protective factors, suggesting that familiarity with screen-based interactions could mitigate cybersickness symptoms. A particularly significant insight was the relationship between motion sickness susceptibility in adulthood and cybersickness intensity, suggesting an intertwined susceptibility pattern between these two phenomena. Furthermore, the research identified a selective impact of cybersickness when dissecting its effects on cognitive domains. While visuospatial working memory suffered from cybersickness, verbal short-term and working memory remained largely untouched. This distinction underscores the complex interplay between neural mechanisms and their susceptibility to cybersickness. One of the most crucial takeaways from this study was the marked difference in the experience and intensity of cybersickness during VR immersion compared to the post-immersion phase. Cybersickness symptomatology showed substantial changes post-immersion. This temporal difference poses significant methodological implications: if cybersickness evaluations are exclusively conducted post immersion, they might not offer reliable results and conclusions. Therefore, for a more accurate understanding of cybersickness, future research endeavours should consider assessment points during immersion and/or post-immersion phases, respective to their research aims.

**Supplementary Materials:** The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/virtualworlds3010004/s1, Video S1: Video Abstract.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, P.K.; methodology, P.K.; software, P.K.; validation, A.P., P.R. and P.K.; formal analysis, P.K.; investigation, A.P.; resources, P.R. and P.K.; data curation, A.P. and P.K.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P. and P.K.; writing—review and editing, A.P., P.R. and P.K.; visualization, P.K.; supervision, P.K.; project administration, P.R. and P.K.; funding acquisition, A.P. and P.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Psychology of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (796-14/07/2023).

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

**Data Availability Statement:** The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to ethical approval requirements.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

**References**

1. Cruz-Neira, C.; Fernández, M.; Portalés, C. Virtual Reality and Games. *Multimodal Technol. Interact.* **2018**, *2*, 8. [CrossRef]

2. Hartmann, T.; Fox, J. 717C36Entertainment in Virtual Reality and Beyond: The Influence of Embodiment, Co-Location, and Cognitive Distancing on Users' Entertainment Experience. In *The Oxford Handbook of Entertainment Theory*; Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2021; ISBN 978-0-19-007221-6. [CrossRef]

3. McGill, M.; Brewster, S. Virtual Reality Passenger Experiences. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings (AutomotiveUI '19), Utrecht, The Netherlands, 21–25 September 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 434–441.

4. Radianti, J.; Majchrzak, T.A.; Fromm, J.; Wohlgenannt, I. A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. *Comput. Educ.* **2020**, *147*, 103778. [CrossRef]

5. Rojas-Sánchez, M.A.; Palos-Sánchez, P.R.; Folgado-Fernández, J.A. Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis on virtual reality and education. *Educ. Inf. Technol.* **2023**, *28*, 155–192. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
**6. Conclusions**

This study comprehensively explored the modulators, symptomatology, and effects of cybersickness on an array of cognitive, physiological, and psychomotor functions. Notably, in line with our previous studies [45,51], it was found that pupil dilation was a valuable biomarker for cybersickness, reflecting the intensity of the experienced symptoms. Interestingly, demographic factors like sex and age did not significantly predict cybersickness. However, experience with videogames and smartphones emerged as protective factors, suggesting that familiarity with screen-based interactions could mitigate cybersickness symptoms. A particularly significant insight was the relationship between motion sickness susceptibility in adulthood and cybersickness intensity, suggesting an intertwined susceptibility pattern between these two phenomena. Furthermore, the research identified a selective impact of cybersickness when dissecting its effects on cognitive domains. While visuospatial working memory suffered from cybersickness, verbal short-term and working memory remained largely untouched. This distinction underscores the complex interplay between neural mechanisms and their susceptibility to cybersickness. One of the most crucial takeaways from this study was the marked difference in the experience and intensity of cybersickness during VR immersion compared to the post-immersion phase. Cybersickness symptomatology showed substantial changes post-immersion. This temporal difference poses significant methodological implications: if cybersickness evaluations are exclusively conducted post immersion, they might not offer reliable results and conclusions. Therefore, for a more accurate understanding of cybersickness, future research endeavours should consider assessment points during immersion and/or post-immersion phases, respective to their research aims.

**Supplementary Materials:** The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/virtualworlds3010004/s1, Video S1: Video Abstract.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, P.K.; methodology, P.K.; software, P.K.; validation, A.P., P.R. and P.K.; formal analysis, P.K.; investigation, A.P.; resources, P.R. and P.K.; data curation, A.P. and P.K.; writing—original draft preparation, A.P. and P.K.; writing—review and editing, A.P., P.R. and P.K.; visualization, P.K.; supervision, P.K.; project administration, P.R. and P.K.; funding acquisition, A.P. and P.R. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Psychology of the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (796-14/07/2023).

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

**Data Availability Statement:** The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to ethical approval requirements.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

**References**

1. Cruz-Neira, C.; Fernández, M.; Portalés, C. Virtual Reality and Games. *Multimodal Technol. Interact.* **2018**, *2*, 8. [CrossRef]

2. Hartmann, T.; Fox, J. 717C36Entertainment in Virtual Reality and Beyond: The Influence of Embodiment, Co-Location, and Cognitive Distancing on Users' Entertainment Experience. In *The Oxford Handbook of Entertainment Theory*; Vorderer, P., Klimmt, C., Eds.; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2021; ISBN 978-0-19-007221-6. [CrossRef]

3. McGill, M.; Brewster, S. Virtual Reality Passenger Experiences. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications: Adjunct Proceedings (AutomotiveUI '19), Utrecht, The Netherlands, 21–25 September 2019; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 434–441.

4. Radianti, J.; Majchrzak, T.A.; Fromm, J.; Wohlgenannt, I. A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: Design elements, lessons learned, and research agenda. *Comput. Educ.* **2020**, *147*, 103778. [CrossRef]

5. Rojas-Sánchez, M.A.; Palos-Sánchez, P.R.; Folgado-Fernández, J.A. Systematic literature review and bibliometric analysis on virtual reality and education. *Educ. Inf. Technol.* **2023**, *28*, 155–192. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
6. Villena-Taranilla, R.; Tirado-Olivares, S.; Cózar-Gutiérrez, R.; González-Calero, J.A. Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. *Educ. Res. Rev.* **2022**, *35*, 100434. [CrossRef]

7. Barteit, S.; Lanfermann, L.; Bärnighausen, T.; Neuhann, F.; Beiersmann, C. Augmented, Mixed, and Virtual Reality-Based Head-Mounted Devices for Medical Education: Systematic Review. *JMIR Serious Games* **2021**, *9*, e29080. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8. De Ponti, R.; Marazzato, J.; Maresca, A.M.; Rovera, F.; Carcano, G.; Ferrario, M.M. Pre-graduation medical training including virtual reality during COVID-19 pandemic: A report on students' perception. *BMC Med. Educ.* **2020**, *20*, 332. [CrossRef]

9. Xie, B.; Liu, H.; Alghofaili, R.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Lobo, F.D.; Li, C.; Li, W.; Huang, H.; Akdere, M.; et al. A Review on Virtual Reality Skill Training Applications. *Front. Virtual Real.* **2021**, *2*, 645153. [CrossRef]

10. Pourmand, A.; Davis, S.; Marchak, A.; Whiteside, T.; Sikka, N. Virtual Reality as a Clinical Tool for Pain Management. *Curr. Pain Headache Rep.* **2018**, *22*, 53. [CrossRef]

11. de Araújo, A.V.L.; de Oliveira Neiva, J.F.; de Mello Monteiro, C.B.; Magalhães, F.H. Efficacy of Virtual Reality Rehabilitation after Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review. *BioMed Res. Int.* **2019**, *2019*, 7106951. [CrossRef]

12. Lei, C.; Sunzi, K.; Dai, F.; Liu, X.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, B.; He, L.; Ju, M. Effects of virtual reality rehabilitation training on gait and balance in patients with Parkinson's disease: A systematic review. *PLoS ONE* **2019**, *14*, e0224819. [CrossRef]

13. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Validation of the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL): An Immersive Virtual Reality Neuropsychological Battery with Enhanced Ecological Validity. *J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc.* **2021**, *27*, 181–196. [CrossRef]

14. Kourtesis, P.; MacPherson, S.E. How immersive virtual reality methods may meet the criteria of the National Academy of Neuropsychology and American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology: A software review of the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL). *Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep.* **2021**, *4*, 100151. [CrossRef]

15. Liao, Y.-Y.; Chen, I.-H.; Lin, Y.-J.; Chen, Y.; Hsu, W.-C. Effects of Virtual Reality-Based Physical and Cognitive Training on Executive Function and Dual-Task Gait Performance in Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Control Trial. *Front. Aging Neurosci.* **2019**, *11*, 162. [CrossRef]

16. Chatterjee, K.; Buchanan; Cottrell, K.; Hughes, S.; Day, T.W.; John, N.W. Immersive Virtual Reality for the Cognitive Rehabilitation of Stroke Survivors. *IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng.* **2022**, *30*, 719–728. [CrossRef]

17. Kourtesis, P.; Kouklari, E.-C.; Roussos, P.; Mantas, V.; Papanikolaou, K.; Skaloumbakas, C.; Pehlivanidis, A. Virtual Reality Training of Social Skills in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Examination of Acceptability, Usability, User Experience, Social Skills, and Executive Functions. *Behav. Sci.* **2023**, *13*, 336. [CrossRef]

18. Shahmoradi, L.; Rezayi, S. Cognitive rehabilitation in people with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review of emerging virtual reality-based approaches. *J. Neuroeng. Rehabil.* **2022**, *19*, 91. [CrossRef]

19. Bauer, A.C.M.; Andringa, G. The Potential of Immersive Virtual Reality for Cognitive Training in Elderly. *Gerontology* **2020**, *66*, 614–623. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20. Piech, J.; Czernicki, K. Virtual Reality Rehabilitation and Exergames—Physical and Psychological Impact on Fall Prevention among the Elderly—A Literature Review. *Appl. Sci.* **2021**, *11*, 4098. [CrossRef]

21. Clay, F.; Howett, D.; FitzGerald, J.; Fletcher, P.; Chan, D.; Price, A. Use of Immersive Virtual Reality in the Assessment and Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review. *J. Alzheimer's Dis.* **2020**, *75*, 23–43. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22. Riaz, W.; Khan, Z.Y.; Jawaid, A.; Shahid, S. Virtual Reality (VR)-Based Environmental Enrichment in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Mild Dementia. *Brain Sci.* **2021**, *11*, 1103. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23. Corrigan, N.; Päsärelu, C.-R.; Voinescu, A. Immersive virtual reality for improving cognitive deficits in children with ADHD: A systematic review and meta-analysis. *Virtual Real.* **2023**, *18*, 1–20. [CrossRef]

24. Parsons, T.D.; Duffield, T.; Asbee, J. A Comparison of Virtual Reality Classroom Continuous Performance Tests to Traditional Continuous Performance Tests in Delineating ADHD: A Meta-Analysis. *Neuropsychol. Rev.* **2019**, *29*, 338–356. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25. Romero-Ayuso, D.; Toledano-González, A.; Rodríguez-Martínez, M.D.; Arroyo-Castillo, P.; Triviño-Juárez, J.M.; González, P.; Ariza-Vega, P.; Del Pino González, A.; Segura-Fragoso, A. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Interventions for Children and Adolescents with ADHD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Children* **2021**, *8*, 70. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26. Glaser, N.; Schmidt, M. Systematic Literature Review of Virtual Reality Intervention Design Patterns for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact.* **2022**, *38*, 753–788. [CrossRef]

27. Zhang, M.; Ding, H.; Naumceska, M.; Zhang, Y. Virtual Reality Technology as an Educational and Intervention Tool for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Current Perspectives and Future Directions. *Behav. Sci.* **2022**, *12*, 138. [CrossRef]

28. Rebenitsch, L.; Owen, C. Estimating Cybersickness from Virtual Reality Applications. *Virtual Real.* **2021**, *25*, 165–174. [CrossRef]

29. Stanney, K.M.; Kennedy, R.S.; Drexler, J.M. Cybersickness is Not Simulator Sickness. *Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet.* **1997**, *41*, 1138–1142. [CrossRef]

30. Davis, S.; Nesbitt, K.; Nalivaiko, E. A Systematic Review of Cybersickness. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment, Newcastle, NSW, Australia, 2–3 December 2014; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 1–9.

31. LaViola, J.J. A discussion of cybersickness in virtual environments. *SIGCHI Bull.* **2000**, *32*, 47–56. [CrossRef]
6. Villena-Taranilla, R.; Tirado-Olivares, S.; Cózar-Gutiérrez, R.; González-Calero, J.A. Effects of virtual reality on learning outcomes in K-6 education: A meta-analysis. *Educ. Res. Rev.* **2022**, *35*, 100434. [CrossRef]

7. Barteit, S.; Lanfermann, L.; Bärnighausen, T.; Neuhann, F.; Beiersmann, C. Augmented, Mixed, and Virtual Reality-Based Head-Mounted Devices for Medical Education: Systematic Review. *JMIR Serious Games* **2021**, *9*, e29080. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

8. De Ponti, R.; Marazzato, J.; Maresca, A.M.; Rovera, F.; Carcano, G.; Ferrario, M.M. Pre-graduation medical training including virtual reality during COVID-19 pandemic: A report on students' perception. *BMC Med. Educ.* **2020**, *20*, 332. [CrossRef]

9. Xie, B.; Liu, H.; Alghofaili, R.; Zhang, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Lobo, F.D.; Li, C.; Li, W.; Huang, H.; Akdere, M.; et al. A Review on Virtual Reality Skill Training Applications. *Front. Virtual Real.* **2021**, *2*, 645153. [CrossRef]

10. Pourmand, A.; Davis, S.; Marchak, A.; Whiteside, T.; Sikka, N. Virtual Reality as a Clinical Tool for Pain Management. *Curr. Pain Headache Rep.* **2018**, *22*, 53. [CrossRef]

11. de Araújo, A.V.L.; de Oliveira Neiva, J.F.; de Mello Monteiro, C.B.; Magalhães, F.H. Efficacy of Virtual Reality Rehabilitation after Spinal Cord Injury: A Systematic Review. *BioMed Res. Int.* **2019**, *2019*, 7106951. [CrossRef]

12. Lei, C.; Sunzi, K.; Dai, F.; Liu, X.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, B.; He, L.; Ju, M. Effects of virtual reality rehabilitation training on gait and balance in patients with Parkinson's disease: A systematic review. *PLoS ONE* **2019**, *14*, e0224819. [CrossRef]

13. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Validation of the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL): An Immersive Virtual Reality Neuropsychological Battery with Enhanced Ecological Validity. *J. Int. Neuropsychol. Soc.* **2021**, *27*, 181–196. [CrossRef]

14. Kourtesis, P.; MacPherson, S.E. How immersive virtual reality methods may meet the criteria of the National Academy of Neuropsychology and American Academy of Clinical Neuropsychology: A software review of the Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL). *Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep.* **2021**, *4*, 100151. [CrossRef]

15. Liao, Y.-Y.; Chen, I.-H.; Lin, Y.-J.; Chen, Y.; Hsu, W.-C. Effects of Virtual Reality-Based Physical and Cognitive Training on Executive Function and Dual-Task Gait Performance in Older Adults With Mild Cognitive Impairment: A Randomized Control Trial. *Front. Aging Neurosci.* **2019**, *11*, 162. [CrossRef]

16. Chatterjee, K.; Buchanan; Cottrell, K.; Hughes, S.; Day, T.W.; John, N.W. Immersive Virtual Reality for the Cognitive Rehabilitation of Stroke Survivors. *IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng.* **2022**, *30*, 719–728. [CrossRef]

17. Kourtesis, P.; Kouklari, E.-C.; Roussos, P.; Mantas, V.; Papanikolaou, K.; Skaloumbakas, C.; Pehlivanidis, A. Virtual Reality Training of Social Skills in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder: An Examination of Acceptability, Usability, User Experience, Social Skills, and Executive Functions. *Behav. Sci.* **2023**, *13*, 336. [CrossRef]

18. Shahmoradi, L.; Rezayi, S. Cognitive rehabilitation in people with autism spectrum disorder: A systematic review of emerging virtual reality-based approaches. *J. Neuroeng. Rehabil.* **2022**, *19*, 91. [CrossRef]

19. Bauer, A.C.M.; Andringa, G. The Potential of Immersive Virtual Reality for Cognitive Training in Elderly. *Gerontology* **2020**, *66*, 614–623. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

20. Piech, J.; Czernicki, K. Virtual Reality Rehabilitation and Exergames—Physical and Psychological Impact on Fall Prevention among the Elderly—A Literature Review. *Appl. Sci.* **2021**, *11*, 4098. [CrossRef]

21. Clay, F.; Howett, D.; FitzGerald, J.; Fletcher, P.; Chan, D.; Price, A. Use of Immersive Virtual Reality in the Assessment and Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review. *J. Alzheimer's Dis.* **2020**, *75*, 23–43. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

22. Riaz, W.; Khan, Z.Y.; Jawaid, A.; Shahid, S. Virtual Reality (VR)-Based Environmental Enrichment in Older Adults with Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI) and Mild Dementia. *Brain Sci.* **2021**, *11*, 1103. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

23. Corrigan, N.; Päsärelu, C.-R.; Voinescu, A. Immersive virtual reality for improving cognitive deficits in children with ADHD: A systematic review and meta-analysis. *Virtual Real.* **2023**, *18*, 1–20. [CrossRef]

24. Parsons, T.D.; Duffield, T.; Asbee, J. A Comparison of Virtual Reality Classroom Continuous Performance Tests to Traditional Continuous Performance Tests in Delineating ADHD: A Meta-Analysis. *Neuropsychol. Rev.* **2019**, *29*, 338–356. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

25. Romero-Ayuso, D.; Toledano-González, A.; Rodríguez-Martínez, M.D.; Arroyo-Castillo, P.; Triviño-Juárez, J.M.; González, P.; Ariza-Vega, P.; Del Pino González, A.; Segura-Fragoso, A. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality-Based Interventions for Children and Adolescents with ADHD: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Children* **2021**, *8*, 70. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

26. Glaser, N.; Schmidt, M. Systematic Literature Review of Virtual Reality Intervention Design Patterns for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact.* **2022**, *38*, 753–788. [CrossRef]

27. Zhang, M.; Ding, H.; Naumceska, M.; Zhang, Y. Virtual Reality Technology as an Educational and Intervention Tool for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Current Perspectives and Future Directions. *Behav. Sci.* **2022**, *12*, 138. [CrossRef]

28. Rebenitsch, L.; Owen, C. Estimating Cybersickness from Virtual Reality Applications. *Virtual Real.* **2021**, *25*, 165–174. [CrossRef]

29. Stanney, K.M.; Kennedy, R.S.; Drexler, J.M. Cybersickness is Not Simulator Sickness. *Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet.* **1997**, *41*, 1138–1142. [CrossRef]

30. Davis, S.; Nesbitt, K.; Nalivaiko, E. A Systematic Review of Cybersickness. In Proceedings of the 2014 Conference on Interactive Entertainment, Newcastle, NSW, Australia, 2–3 December 2014; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2014; pp. 1–9.

31. LaViola, J.J. A discussion of cybersickness in virtual environments. *SIGCHI Bull.* **2000**, *32*, 47–56. [CrossRef]
32. Stanney, K.; Lawson, B.; Rokers, B.; Dennison, M.; Fidopiastis, C.; Stoffregen, T.; Weech, S.; Fulvio, J. Identifying Causes of and Solutions for Cybersickness in Immersive Technology: Reformulation of a Research and Development Agenda. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact.* **2020**, *36*, 1783–1803. [CrossRef]

33. Kim, J.; Palmisano, S.; Luu, W.; Iwasaki, S. Effects of Linear Visual-Vestibular Conflict on Presence, Perceived Scene Stability and Cybersickness in the Oculus Go and Oculus Quest. *Front. Virtual Real.* **2021**, *2*, 582156. [CrossRef]

34. Nesbitt, K.; Davis, S.; Blackmore, K.; Nalivaiko, E. Correlating reaction time and nausea measures with traditional measures of cybersickness. *Displays* **2017**, *48*, 1–8. [CrossRef]

35. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Technological Competence Is a Pre-condition for Effective Implementation of Virtual Reality Head Mounted Displays in Human Neuroscience: A Technological Review and Meta-Analysis. *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* **2019**, *13*, 342. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

36. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Validation of the Virtual Reality Neuroscience Questionnaire: Maximum Duration of Immersive Virtual Reality Sessions without the Presence of Pertinent Adverse Symptomatology. *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* **2019**, *13*, 417. [CrossRef]

37. Cheung, B.; Hofer, K. Desensitization to Strong Vestibular Stimuli Improves Tolerance to Simulated Aircraft Motion. *Aviat. Space Environ. Med.* **2005**, *76*, 1099–1104.

38. Golding, J.F.; Gresty, M.A. Pathophysiology and treatment of motion sickness. *Curr. Opin. Neurol.* **2015**, *28*, 83–88. [CrossRef]

39. Farmani, Y.; Teather, R.J. Evaluating Discrete Viewpoint Control to Reduce Cybersickness in Virtual Reality. *Virtual Real.* **2020**, *24*, 645–664. [CrossRef]

40. Nie, G.-Y.; Duh, H.B.-L.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y. Analysis on Mitigation of Visually Induced Motion Sickness by Applying Dynamical Blurring on a User's Retina. *IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.* **2020**, *26*, 2535–2545. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

41. Szpak, A.; Michalski, S.C.; Saredakis, D.; Chen, C.S.; Loetscher, T. Beyond Feeling Sick: The Visual and Cognitive Aftereffects of Virtual Reality. *IEEE Access* **2019**, *7*, 130883–130892. [CrossRef]

42. Kennedy, R.S.; Lane, N.E.; Berbaum, K.S.; Lilienthal, M.G. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. *Int. J. Aviat. Psychol.* **1993**, *3*, 203–220. [CrossRef]

43. Kim, H.K.; Park, J.; Choi, Y.; Choe, M. Virtual reality sickness questionnaire (VRSQ): Motion sickness measurement index in a virtual reality environment. *Appl. Ergon.* **2018**, *69*, 66–73. [CrossRef]

44. Bouchard, S.; Berthiaume, M.; Robillard, G.; Forget, H.; Daudelin-Peltier, C.; Renaud, P.; Blais, C.; Fiset, D. Arguing in Favor of Revising the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire Factor Structure When Assessing Side Effects Induced by Immersions in Virtual Reality. *Front. Psychiatry* **2021**, *12*, 739742. [CrossRef]

45. Kourtesis, P.; Linnell, J.; Amir, R.; Argelaguet, F.; MacPherson, S.E. Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Questionnaire (CSQ-VR): A Validation and Comparison against SSQ and VRSQ. *Virtual Worlds* **2023**, *2*, 16–35. [CrossRef]

46. Sevinc, V.; Berkman, M.I. Psychometric evaluation of Simulator Sickness Questionnaire and its variants as a measure of cybersickness in consumer virtual environments. *Appl. Ergon.* **2020**, *82*, 102958. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

47. Stone Iii, W.B. Psychometric Evaluation of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire as a Measure of Cybersickness. Ph.D. Thesis, Iowa State University, Digital Repository, Ames, IA, USA, 2017; p. 11054762.

48. Weech, S.; Kenny, S.; Barnett-Cowan, M. Presence and Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Are Negatively Related: A Review. *Front. Psychol.* **2019**, *10*, 158. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

49. Chang, E.; Billinghurst, M.; Yoo, B. Brain activity during cybersickness: A scoping review. *Virtual Real.* **2023**, *27*, 2073–2097. [CrossRef]

50. Dennison, M.S.; Wisti, A.Z.; D'Zmura, M. Use of physiological signals to predict cybersickness. *Displays* **2016**, *44*, 42–52. [CrossRef]

51. Kourtesis, P.; Amir, R.; Linnell, J.; Argelaguet, F.; MacPherson, S.E. Cybersickness, Cognition, & Motor Skills: The Effects of Music, Gender, and Gaming Experience. *IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.* **2023**, *29*, 2326–2336. [CrossRef]

52. Saredakis, D.; Szpak, A.; Birckhead, B.; Keage, H.A.D.; Rizzo, A.; Loetscher, T. Factors Associated With Virtual Reality Sickness in Head-Mounted Displays: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* **2020**, *14*, 96. [CrossRef]

53. Melo, M.; Vasconcelos-Raposo, J.; Bessa, M. Presence and cybersickness in immersive content: Effects of content type, exposure time and gender. *Comput. Graph.* **2018**, *71*, 159–165. [CrossRef]

54. Stanney, K.; Fidopiastis, C.; Foster, L. Virtual Reality Is Sexist: But It Does Not Have to Be. *Front. Robot. AI* **2020**, *7*, 4. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

55. Dahlman, J.; Sjörs, A.; Lindström, J.; Ledin, T.; Falkmer, T. Performance and Autonomic Responses During Motion Sickness. *Hum. Factors* **2009**, *51*, 56–66. [CrossRef]

56. Mittelstaedt, J.M.; Wacker, J.; Stelling, D. VR Aftereffect and the Relation of Cybersickness and Cognitive Performance. *Virtual Real.* **2019**, *23*, 143–154. [CrossRef]

57. Nalivaiko, E.; Davis, S.L.; Blackmore, K.L.; Vakulin, A.; Nesbitt, K.V. Cybersickness provoked by head-mounted display affects cutaneous vascular tone, heart rate and reaction time. *Physiol. Behav.* **2015**, *151*, 583–590. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

58. Varmaghani, S.; Abbasi, Z.; Weech, S.; Rasti, J. Spatial and Attentional Aftereffects of Virtual Reality and Relations to Cybersickness. *Virtual Real.* **2022**, *26*, 659–668. [CrossRef]

59. Knibbe, J.; Schjerlund, J.; Traeaeus, M.; Hornbæk, K. The Dream is Collapsing: The Experience of Exiting VR. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18), Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1–13.
32. Stanney, K.; Lawson, B.; Rokers, B.; Dennison, M.; Fidopiastis, C.; Stoffregen, T.; Weech, S.; Fulvio, J. Identifying Causes of and Solutions for Cybersickness in Immersive Technology: Reformulation of a Research and Development Agenda. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Interact.* **2020**, *36*, 1783–1803. [CrossRef]

33. Kim, J.; Palmisano, S.; Luu, W.; Iwasaki, S. Effects of Linear Visual-Vestibular Conflict on Presence, Perceived Scene Stability and Cybersickness in the Oculus Go and Oculus Quest. *Front. Virtual Real.* **2021**, *2*, 582156. [CrossRef]

34. Nesbitt, K.; Davis, S.; Blackmore, K.; Nalivaiko, E. Correlating reaction time and nausea measures with traditional measures of cybersickness. *Displays* **2017**, *48*, 1–8. [CrossRef]

35. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Technological Competence Is a Pre-condition for Effective Implementation of Virtual Reality Head Mounted Displays in Human Neuroscience: A Technological Review and Meta-Analysis. *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* **2019**, *13*, 342. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

36. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Validation of the Virtual Reality Neuroscience Questionnaire: Maximum Duration of Immersive Virtual Reality Sessions without the Presence of Pertinent Adverse Symptomatology. *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* **2019**, *13*, 417. [CrossRef]

37. Cheung, B.; Hofer, K. Desensitization to Strong Vestibular Stimuli Improves Tolerance to Simulated Aircraft Motion. *Aviat. Space Environ. Med.* **2005**, *76*, 1099–1104.

38. Golding, J.F.; Gresty, M.A. Pathophysiology and treatment of motion sickness. *Curr. Opin. Neurol.* **2015**, *28*, 83–88. [CrossRef]

39. Farmani, Y.; Teather, R.J. Evaluating Discrete Viewpoint Control to Reduce Cybersickness in Virtual Reality. *Virtual Real.* **2020**, *24*, 645–664. [CrossRef]

40. Nie, G.-Y.; Duh, H.B.-L.; Liu, Y.; Wang, Y. Analysis on Mitigation of Visually Induced Motion Sickness by Applying Dynamical Blurring on a User's Retina. *IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.* **2020**, *26*, 2535–2545. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

41. Szpak, A.; Michalski, S.C.; Saredakis, D.; Chen, C.S.; Loetscher, T. Beyond Feeling Sick: The Visual and Cognitive Aftereffects of Virtual Reality. *IEEE Access* **2019**, *7*, 130883–130892. [CrossRef]

42. Kennedy, R.S.; Lane, N.E.; Berbaum, K.S.; Lilienthal, M.G. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. *Int. J. Aviat. Psychol.* **1993**, *3*, 203–220. [CrossRef]

43. Kim, H.K.; Park, J.; Choi, Y.; Choe, M. Virtual reality sickness questionnaire (VRSQ): Motion sickness measurement index in a virtual reality environment. *Appl. Ergon.* **2018**, *69*, 66–73. [CrossRef]

44. Bouchard, S.; Berthiaume, M.; Robillard, G.; Forget, H.; Daudelin-Peltier, C.; Renaud, P.; Blais, C.; Fiset, D. Arguing in Favor of Revising the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire Factor Structure When Assessing Side Effects Induced by Immersions in Virtual Reality. *Front. Psychiatry* **2021**, *12*, 739742. [CrossRef]

45. Kourtesis, P.; Linnell, J.; Amir, R.; Argelaguet, F.; MacPherson, S.E. Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Questionnaire (CSQ-VR): A Validation and Comparison against SSQ and VRSQ. *Virtual Worlds* **2023**, *2*, 16–35. [CrossRef]

46. Sevinc, V.; Berkman, M.I. Psychometric evaluation of Simulator Sickness Questionnaire and its variants as a measure of cybersickness in consumer virtual environments. *Appl. Ergon.* **2020**, *82*, 102958. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

47. Stone Iii, W.B. Psychometric Evaluation of the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire as a Measure of Cybersickness. Ph.D. Thesis, Iowa State University, Digital Repository, Ames, IA, USA, 2017; p. 11054762.

48. Weech, S.; Kenny, S.; Barnett-Cowan, M. Presence and Cybersickness in Virtual Reality Are Negatively Related: A Review. *Front. Psychol.* **2019**, *10*, 158. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

49. Chang, E.; Billinghurst, M.; Yoo, B. Brain activity during cybersickness: A scoping review. *Virtual Real.* **2023**, *27*, 2073–2097. [CrossRef]

50. Dennison, M.S.; Wisti, A.Z.; D'Zmura, M. Use of physiological signals to predict cybersickness. *Displays* **2016**, *44*, 42–52. [CrossRef]

51. Kourtesis, P.; Amir, R.; Linnell, J.; Argelaguet, F.; MacPherson, S.E. Cybersickness, Cognition, & Motor Skills: The Effects of Music, Gender, and Gaming Experience. *IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.* **2023**, *29*, 2326–2336. [CrossRef]

52. Saredakis, D.; Szpak, A.; Birckhead, B.; Keage, H.A.D.; Rizzo, A.; Loetscher, T. Factors Associated With Virtual Reality Sickness in Head-Mounted Displays: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. *Front. Hum. Neurosci.* **2020**, *14*, 96. [CrossRef]

53. Melo, M.; Vasconcelos-Raposo, J.; Bessa, M. Presence and cybersickness in immersive content: Effects of content type, exposure time and gender. *Comput. Graph.* **2018**, *71*, 159–165. [CrossRef]

54. Stanney, K.; Fidopiastis, C.; Foster, L. Virtual Reality Is Sexist: But It Does Not Have to Be. *Front. Robot. AI* **2020**, *7*, 4. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

55. Dahlman, J.; Sjörs, A.; Lindström, J.; Ledin, T.; Falkmer, T. Performance and Autonomic Responses During Motion Sickness. *Hum. Factors* **2009**, *51*, 56–66. [CrossRef]

56. Mittelstaedt, J.M.; Wacker, J.; Stelling, D. VR Aftereffect and the Relation of Cybersickness and Cognitive Performance. *Virtual Real.* **2019**, *23*, 143–154. [CrossRef]

57. Nalivaiko, E.; Davis, S.L.; Blackmore, K.L.; Vakulin, A.; Nesbitt, K.V. Cybersickness provoked by head-mounted display affects cutaneous vascular tone, heart rate and reaction time. *Physiol. Behav.* **2015**, *151*, 583–590. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

58. Varmaghani, S.; Abbasi, Z.; Weech, S.; Rasti, J. Spatial and Attentional Aftereffects of Virtual Reality and Relations to Cybersickness. *Virtual Real.* **2022**, *26*, 659–668. [CrossRef]

59. Knibbe, J.; Schjerlund, J.; Traeaeus, M.; Hornbæk, K. The Dream is Collapsing: The Experience of Exiting VR. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '18), Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2018; pp. 1–13.
60. Sepich, N.C.; Jasper, A.; Fieffer, S.; Gilbert, S.B.; Dorneich, M.C.; Kelly, J.W. The impact of task workload on cybersickness. *Front. Virtual Real. 2022*, 3, 943409. [CrossRef]

61. Abeele, V.V.; Schraepen, B.; Huygelier, H.; Gillebert, C.; Gerling, K.; Van Ee, R. Immersive Virtual Reality for Older Adults: Empirically Grounded Design Guidelines. *ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 2021*, 14, 14. [CrossRef]

62. Garcia Fracaro, S.; Chan, P.; Gallagher, T.; Tehreem, Y.; Toyoda, R.; Bernaerts, K.; Glassey, J.; Pfeiffer, T.; Slof, B.; Wachsmuth, S.; et al. Towards design guidelines for virtual reality training for the chemical industry. *Educ. Chem. Eng.* **2021**, *36*, 12–23. [CrossRef]

63. Kourtesis, P.; Korre, D.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Guidelines for the Development of Immersive Virtual Reality Software for Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology: The Development of Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL), a Neuropsychological Test Battery in Immersive Virtual Reality. *Front. Comput. Sci.* **2020**, *1*, 12. [CrossRef]

64. Monge Pereira, E.; Molina Rueda, F.; Alguacil Diego, I.M.; Cano De La Cuerda, R.; De Mauro, A.; Miangolarra Page, J.C. Use of virtual reality systems as proprioception method in cerebral palsy: Clinical practice guideline. *Neurología* **2014**, *29*, 550–559. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

65. O'Connor, E.A.; Domingo, J. A Practical Guide, With Theoretical Underpinnings, for Creating Effective Virtual Reality Learning Environments. *J. Educ. Technol. Syst.* **2017**, *45*, 343–364. [CrossRef]

66. Monteiro, D.; Liang, H.-N.; Wang, J.; Chen, H.; Baghaei, N. An In-Depth Exploration of the Effect of 2D/3D Views and Controller Types on First Person Shooter Games in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Porto de Galinhas, Brazil, 9–13 November 2020; pp. 713–724.

67. Wood, C.D.; Manno, J.E.; Wood, M.J.; Manno, B.R.; Mims, M.E. Comparison of Efficacy of Ginger with Various Antimotion Sickness Drugs. *Clin. Res. Pract. Drug Regul. Aff.* **1988**, *6*, 129–136. [CrossRef]

68. Risi, D.; Palmisano, S. Effects of postural stability, active control, exposure duration and repeated exposures on HMD induced cybersickness. *Displays* **2019**, *60*, 9–17. [CrossRef]

69. Sokołowska, B. Impact of Virtual Reality Cognitive and Motor Exercises on Brain Health. *Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health* **2023**, *20*, 4150. [CrossRef]

70. Somrak, A.; Pogačnik, M.; Guna, J. Suitability and Comparison of Questionnaires Assessing Virtual Reality-Induced Symptoms and Effects and User Experience in Virtual Environments. *Sensors* **2021**, *21*, 1185. [CrossRef]

71. Sharples, S.; Cobb, S.; Moody, A.; Wilson, J.R. Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): Comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. *Displays* **2008**, *29*, 58–69. [CrossRef]

72. Kim, Y.Y.; Kim, H.J.; Kim, E.N.; Ko, H.D.; Kim, H.T. Characteristic changes in the physiological components of cybersickness. *Psychophysiology* **2005**, *42*, 616–625. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

73. Gavgani, A.M.; Nesbitt, K.V.; Blackmore, K.L.; Nalivaiko, E. Profiling subjective symptoms and autonomic changes associated with cybersickness. *Auton. Neurosci.* **2017**, *203*, 41–50. [CrossRef]

74. Golding, J.F. Phasic skin conductance activity and motion sickness. *Aviat. Space Environ. Med.* **1992**, *63*, 165–171.

75. Pacchierotti, C.; Sinclair, S.; Solazzi, M.; Frisoli, A.; Hayward, V.; Prattichizzo, D. Wearable Haptic Systems for the Fingertip and the Hand: Taxonomy, Review, and Perspectives. *IEEE Trans. Haptics* **2017**, *10*, 580–600. [CrossRef]

76. Kourtesis, P.; Argelaguet, F.; Vizcay, S.; Marchal, M.; Pacchierotti, C. Electrotactile Feedback Applications for Hand and Arm Interactions: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Future Directions. *IEEE Trans. Haptics* **2022**, *15*, 479–496. [CrossRef]

77. Chang, E.; Kim, H.T.; Yoo, B. Predicting cybersickness based on user's gaze behaviors in HMD-based virtual reality. *J. Comput. Des. Eng.* **2021**, *8*, 728–739. [CrossRef]

78. Wang, J.; Liang, H.-N.; Monteiro, D.; Xu, W.; Xiao, J. Real-Time Prediction of Simulator Sickness in Virtual Reality Games. *IEEE Trans. Games* **2023**, *15*, 252–261. [CrossRef]

79. Islam, R.; Desai, K.; Quarles, J. Cybersickness Prediction from Integrated HMD's Sensors: A Multimodal Deep Fusion Approach using Eye-tracking and Head-tracking Data. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Bari, Italy, 4–8 October 2021; pp. 31–40.

80. Petri, K.; Feuerstein, K.; Folster, S.; Bariszlovich, F.; Witte, K. Effects of Age, Gender, Familiarity with the Content, and Exposure Time on Cybersickness in Immersive Head-mounted Display Based Virtual Reality. *Am. J. Biomed. Sci.* **2020**, *12*, 107–121. [CrossRef]

81. Stanney, K.M.; Hale, K.S.; Nahmens, I.; Kennedy, R.S. What to Expect from Immersive Virtual Environment Exposure: Influences of Gender, Body Mass Index, and Past Experience. *Hum. Factors* **2003**, *45*, 504–520. [CrossRef]

82. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. An ecologically valid examination of event-based and time-based prospective memory using immersive virtual reality: The effects of delay and task type on everyday prospective memory. *Memory* **2021**, *29*, 486–506. [CrossRef]

83. Kourtesis, P.; MacPherson, S.E. An ecologically valid examination of event-based and time-based prospective memory using immersive virtual reality: The influence of attention, memory, and executive function processes on real-world prospective memory. *Neuropsychol. Rehabil.* **2023**, *33*, 255–280. [CrossRef]

84. Weech, S.; Kenny, S.; Lenizky, M.; Barnett-Cowan, M. Narrative and gaming experience interact to affect presence and cybersickness in virtual reality. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud.* **2020**, *138*, 102398. [CrossRef]

85. Golding, J.F.; Rafiq, A.; Keshavarz, B. Predicting Individual Susceptibility to Visually Induced Motion Sickness by Questionnaire. *Front. Virtual Real.* **2021**, *2*, 576871. [CrossRef]
60. Sepich, N.C.; Jasper, A.; Fieffer, S.; Gilbert, S.B.; Dorneich, M.C.; Kelly, J.W. The impact of task workload on cybersickness. *Front. Virtual Real. 2022*, 3, 943409. [CrossRef]

61. Abeele, V.V.; Schraepen, B.; Huygelier, H.; Gillebert, C.; Gerling, K.; Van Ee, R. Immersive Virtual Reality for Older Adults: Empirically Grounded Design Guidelines. *ACM Trans. Access. Comput. 2021*, 14, 14. [CrossRef]

62. Garcia Fracaro, S.; Chan, P.; Gallagher, T.; Tehreem, Y.; Toyoda, R.; Bernaerts, K.; Glassey, J.; Pfeiffer, T.; Slof, B.; Wachsmuth, S.; et al. Towards design guidelines for virtual reality training for the chemical industry. *Educ. Chem. Eng.* **2021**, *36*, 12–23. [CrossRef]

63. Kourtesis, P.; Korre, D.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. Guidelines for the Development of Immersive Virtual Reality Software for Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuropsychology: The Development of Virtual Reality Everyday Assessment Lab (VR-EAL), a Neuropsychological Test Battery in Immersive Virtual Reality. *Front. Comput. Sci.* **2020**, *1*, 12. [CrossRef]

64. Monge Pereira, E.; Molina Rueda, F.; Alguacil Diego, I.M.; Cano De La Cuerda, R.; De Mauro, A.; Miangolarra Page, J.C. Use of virtual reality systems as proprioception method in cerebral palsy: Clinical practice guideline. *Neurología* **2014**, *29*, 550–559. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

65. O'Connor, E.A.; Domingo, J. A Practical Guide, With Theoretical Underpinnings, for Creating Effective Virtual Reality Learning Environments. *J. Educ. Technol. Syst.* **2017**, *45*, 343–364. [CrossRef]

66. Monteiro, D.; Liang, H.-N.; Wang, J.; Chen, H.; Baghaei, N. An In-Depth Exploration of the Effect of 2D/3D Views and Controller Types on First Person Shooter Games in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Porto de Galinhas, Brazil, 9–13 November 2020; pp. 713–724.

67. Wood, C.D.; Manno, J.E.; Wood, M.J.; Manno, B.R.; Mims, M.E. Comparison of Efficacy of Ginger with Various Antimotion Sickness Drugs. *Clin. Res. Pract. Drug Regul. Aff.* **1988**, *6*, 129–136. [CrossRef]

68. Risi, D.; Palmisano, S. Effects of postural stability, active control, exposure duration and repeated exposures on HMD induced cybersickness. *Displays* **2019**, *60*, 9–17. [CrossRef]

69. Sokołowska, B. Impact of Virtual Reality Cognitive and Motor Exercises on Brain Health. *Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health* **2023**, *20*, 4150. [CrossRef]

70. Somrak, A.; Pogačnik, M.; Guna, J. Suitability and Comparison of Questionnaires Assessing Virtual Reality-Induced Symptoms and Effects and User Experience in Virtual Environments. *Sensors* **2021**, *21*, 1185. [CrossRef]

71. Sharples, S.; Cobb, S.; Moody, A.; Wilson, J.R. Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): Comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. *Displays* **2008**, *29*, 58–69. [CrossRef]

72. Kim, Y.Y.; Kim, H.J.; Kim, E.N.; Ko, H.D.; Kim, H.T. Characteristic changes in the physiological components of cybersickness. *Psychophysiology* **2005**, *42*, 616–625. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

73. Gavgani, A.M.; Nesbitt, K.V.; Blackmore, K.L.; Nalivaiko, E. Profiling subjective symptoms and autonomic changes associated with cybersickness. *Auton. Neurosci.* **2017**, *203*, 41–50. [CrossRef]

74. Golding, J.F. Phasic skin conductance activity and motion sickness. *Aviat. Space Environ. Med.* **1992**, *63*, 165–171.

75. Pacchierotti, C.; Sinclair, S.; Solazzi, M.; Frisoli, A.; Hayward, V.; Prattichizzo, D. Wearable Haptic Systems for the Fingertip and the Hand: Taxonomy, Review, and Perspectives. *IEEE Trans. Haptics* **2017**, *10*, 580–600. [CrossRef]

76. Kourtesis, P.; Argelaguet, F.; Vizcay, S.; Marchal, M.; Pacchierotti, C. Electrotactile Feedback Applications for Hand and Arm Interactions: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and Future Directions. *IEEE Trans. Haptics* **2022**, *15*, 479–496. [CrossRef]

77. Chang, E.; Kim, H.T.; Yoo, B. Predicting cybersickness based on user's gaze behaviors in HMD-based virtual reality. *J. Comput. Des. Eng.* **2021**, *8*, 728–739. [CrossRef]

78. Wang, J.; Liang, H.-N.; Monteiro, D.; Xu, W.; Xiao, J. Real-Time Prediction of Simulator Sickness in Virtual Reality Games. *IEEE Trans. Games* **2023**, *15*, 252–261. [CrossRef]

79. Islam, R.; Desai, K.; Quarles, J. Cybersickness Prediction from Integrated HMD's Sensors: A Multimodal Deep Fusion Approach using Eye-tracking and Head-tracking Data. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), Bari, Italy, 4–8 October 2021; pp. 31–40.

80. Petri, K.; Feuerstein, K.; Folster, S.; Bariszlovich, F.; Witte, K. Effects of Age, Gender, Familiarity with the Content, and Exposure Time on Cybersickness in Immersive Head-mounted Display Based Virtual Reality. *Am. J. Biomed. Sci.* **2020**, *12*, 107–121. [CrossRef]

81. Stanney, K.M.; Hale, K.S.; Nahmens, I.; Kennedy, R.S. What to Expect from Immersive Virtual Environment Exposure: Influences of Gender, Body Mass Index, and Past Experience. *Hum. Factors* **2003**, *45*, 504–520. [CrossRef]

82. Kourtesis, P.; Collina, S.; Doumas, L.A.A.; MacPherson, S.E. An ecologically valid examination of event-based and time-based prospective memory using immersive virtual reality: The effects of delay and task type on everyday prospective memory. *Memory* **2021**, *29*, 486–506. [CrossRef]

83. Kourtesis, P.; MacPherson, S.E. An ecologically valid examination of event-based and time-based prospective memory using immersive virtual reality: The influence of attention, memory, and executive function processes on real-world prospective memory. *Neuropsychol. Rehabil.* **2023**, *33*, 255–280. [CrossRef]

84. Weech, S.; Kenny, S.; Lenizky, M.; Barnett-Cowan, M. Narrative and gaming experience interact to affect presence and cybersickness in virtual reality. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud.* **2020**, *138*, 102398. [CrossRef]

85. Golding, J.F.; Rafiq, A.; Keshavarz, B. Predicting Individual Susceptibility to Visually Induced Motion Sickness by Questionnaire. *Front. Virtual Real.* **2021**, *2*, 576871. [CrossRef]
86. Lukacova, I.; Keshavarz, B.; Golding, J.F. Measuring the susceptibility to visually induced motion sickness and its relationship with vertigo, dizziness, migraine, syncope and personality traits. *Exp. Brain Res.* **2023**, *241*, 1381–1391. [CrossRef]

87. Golding, J.F. Motion sickness susceptibility questionnaire revised and its relationship to other forms of sickness. *Brain Res. Bull.* **1998**, *47*, 507–516. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

88. Golding, J.F. Predicting individual differences in motion sickness susceptibility by questionnaire. *Personal. Individ. Differ.* **2006**, *41*, 237–248. [CrossRef]

89. Paillard, A.C.; Quarck, G.; Paolino, F.; Denise, P.; Paolino, M.; Golding, J.F.; Ghulyan-Bedikian, V. Motion sickness susceptibility in healthy subjects and vestibular patients: Effects of gender, age and trait-anxiety. *J. Vestib. Res.* **2013**, *23*, 203–209. [CrossRef]

90. Conner, N.O.; Freeman, H.R.; Jones, J.A.; Luczak, T.; Carruth, D.; Knight, A.C.; Chander, H. Virtual Reality Induced Symptoms and Effects: Concerns, Causes, Assessment & Mitigation. *Virtual Worlds* **2022**, *1*, 130–146. [CrossRef]

91. Schwind, V.; Knierim, P.; Tasci, C.; Franczak, P.; Haas, N.; Henze, N. "These Are Not My Hands!": Effect of Gender on the Perception of Avatar Hands in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, CO, USA, 6–11 May 2017; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 1577–1582, ISBN 978-1-4503-4655-9.

92. Bebko, A.O.; Troje, N.F. bmlTUX: Design and Control of Experiments in Virtual Reality and Beyond. *i-Perception* **2020**, *11*, 2041669520938400. [CrossRef]

93. *Standard ISO 9241-400:2007; Ergonomics of Human—System Interaction—Part 400: Principles and Requirements for Physical Input Devices. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/38896.html* (accessed on 1 January 2024).

94. Kourtesis, P.; Vizcay, S.; Marchal, M.; Pacchierotti, C.; Argelaguet, F. Action-Specific Perception & Performance on a Fitts's Law Task in Virtual Reality: The Role of Haptic Feedback. *IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.* **2022**, *28*, 3715–3726. [CrossRef]

95. Wechsler, D. *WAIS-IV: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale*; Psychological Corporation: New York, NY, USA, 2008.

96. Donolato, E.; Giofrè, D.; Mammarella, I.C. Differences in Verbal and Visuospatial Forward and Backward Order Recall: A Review of the Literature. *Front. Psychol.* **2017**, *8*, 663. [CrossRef]

97. Corsi, P.M. *Human Memory and the Medial Temporal Region of the Brain*; ProQuest Information & Learning: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1973; Volume 34, p. 891.

98. Kessels, R.P.C.; van den Berg, E.; Ruis, C.; Brands, A.M.A. The backward span of the Corsi Block-Tapping Task and its association with the WAIS-III Digit Span. *Assessment* **2008**, *15*, 426–434. [CrossRef]

99. Deary, I.J.; Liewald, D.; Nissan, J. A free, easy-to-use, computer-based simple and four-choice reaction time programme: The Deary-Liewald reaction time task. *Behav. Res.* **2011**, *43*, 258–268. [CrossRef]

100. R Core Team. *R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing*; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2022. Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 1 January 2024).

101. RStudio Team. *RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R*; RStudio, PBC: Boston, MA, USA, 2022. Available online: http://www.rstudio.com/ (accessed on 1 January 2024).

102. Revelle, W. *psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research*; Northwestern University: Evanston, IL, USA, 2022. Available online: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych (accessed on 1 January 2024).

103. Wickham, H. * ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis*; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-3-319-24277-4. Available online: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (accessed on 1 January 2024).

104. Bates, D.; Mächler, M.; Bolker, B.; Walker, S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. *J. Stat. Softw.* **2015**, *67*, 1–48. [CrossRef]

105. Peterson, R.A.; Cavanaugh, J.E. Ordered quantile normalization: A semiparametric transformation built for the cross-validation era. *J. Appl. Stat.* **2020**, *47*, 2312–2327. [CrossRef]

106. Partala, T.; Surakka, V. Pupil size variation as an indication of affective processing. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud.* **2003**, *59*, 185–198. [CrossRef]

107. Chattha, U.A.; Janjua, U.I.; Anwar, F.; Madni, T.M.; Cheema, M.F.; Janjua, S.I. Motion Sickness in Virtual Reality: An Empirical Evaluation. *IEEE Access* **2020**, *8*, 130486–130499. [CrossRef]

108. Bouchrika, I. Mobile vs Desktop Usage Statistics for 2023. Available online: https://research.com/software/mobile-vs-desktop-usage (accessed on 21 October 2023).

109. Soewardi, H.; Izzuddin, M.N. Study of Cybersickness on Non-Immersive Virtual Reality Using Smartphone. *Malays. J. Public Health Med.* **2020**, *20*, 88–93. [CrossRef]

110. Kemeny, A.; Chardonnet, J.-R.; Colombet, F. Visualization and Motion Systems. In *Getting Rid of Cybersickness: In Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Simulators*; Kemeny, A., Chardonnet, J.-R., Colombet, F., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 63–91. ISBN 978-3-030-59342-1.

111. Keshavarz, B.; Saryazdi, R.; Campos, J.L.; Golding, J.F. Introducing the VIMSSQ: Measuring susceptibility to visually induced motion sickness. *Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet.* **2019**, *63*, 2267–2271. [CrossRef]

112. Grassini, S.; Laumann, K.; Luzi, A.K. Association of Individual Factors with Simulator Sickness and Sense of Presence in Virtual Reality Mediated by Head-Mounted Displays (HMDs). *Multimodal Technol. Interact.* **2021**, *5*, 7. [CrossRef]
86. Lukacova, I.; Keshavarz, B.; Golding, J.F. Measuring the susceptibility to visually induced motion sickness and its relationship with vertigo, dizziness, migraine, syncope and personality traits. *Exp. Brain Res.* **2023**, *241*, 1381–1391. [CrossRef]

87. Golding, J.F. Motion sickness susceptibility questionnaire revised and its relationship to other forms of sickness. *Brain Res. Bull.* **1998**, *47*, 507–516. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

88. Golding, J.F. Predicting individual differences in motion sickness susceptibility by questionnaire. *Personal. Individ. Differ.* **2006**, *41*, 237–248. [CrossRef]

89. Paillard, A.C.; Quarck, G.; Paolino, F.; Denise, P.; Paolino, M.; Golding, J.F.; Ghulyan-Bedikian, V. Motion sickness susceptibility in healthy subjects and vestibular patients: Effects of gender, age and trait-anxiety. *J. Vestib. Res.* **2013**, *23*, 203–209. [CrossRef]

90. Conner, N.O.; Freeman, H.R.; Jones, J.A.; Luczak, T.; Carruth, D.; Knight, A.C.; Chander, H. Virtual Reality Induced Symptoms and Effects: Concerns, Causes, Assessment & Mitigation. *Virtual Worlds* **2022**, *1*, 130–146. [CrossRef]

91. Schwind, V.; Knierim, P.; Tasci, C.; Franczak, P.; Haas, N.; Henze, N. "These Are Not My Hands!": Effect of Gender on the Perception of Avatar Hands in Virtual Reality. In *Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Denver, CO, USA, 6–11 May 2017; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2017; pp. 1577–1582, ISBN 978-1-4503-4655-9*.

92. Bebko, A.O.; Troje, N.F. bmlTUX: Design and Control of Experiments in Virtual Reality and Beyond. *i-Perception* **2020**, *11*, 2041669520938400. [CrossRef]

93. *Standard ISO 9241-400:2007; Ergonomics of Human—System Interaction—Part 400: Principles and Requirements for Physical Input Devices. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2007. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/38896.html* (accessed on 1 January 2024).

94. Kourtesis, P.; Vizcay, S.; Marchal, M.; Pacchierotti, C.; Argelaguet, F. Action-Specific Perception & Performance on a Fitts's Law Task in Virtual Reality: The Role of Haptic Feedback. *IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph.* **2022**, *28*, 3715–3726. [CrossRef]

95. Wechsler, D. *WAIS-IV: Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale*; Psychological Corporation: New York, NY, USA, 2008.

96. Donolato, E.; Giofrè, D.; Mammarella, I.C. Differences in Verbal and Visuospatial Forward and Backward Order Recall: A Review of the Literature. *Front. Psychol.* **2017**, *8*, 663. [CrossRef]

97. Corsi, P.M. *Human Memory and the Medial Temporal Region of the Brain*; ProQuest Information & Learning: Ann Arbor, MI, USA, 1973; Volume 34, p. 891.

98. Kessels, R.P.C.; van den Berg, E.; Ruis, C.; Brands, A.M.A. The backward span of the Corsi Block-Tapping Task and its association with the WAIS-III Digit Span. *Assessment* **2008**, *15*, 426–434. [CrossRef]

99. Deary, I.J.; Liewald, D.; Nissan, J. A free, easy-to-use, computer-based simple and four-choice reaction time programme: The Deary-Liewald reaction time task. *Behav. Res.* **2011**, *43*, 258–268. [CrossRef]

100. R Core Team. *R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing*; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2022. Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 1 January 2024).

101. RStudio Team. *RStudio: Integrated Development Environment for R*; RStudio, PBC: Boston, MA, USA, 2022. Available online: http://www.rstudio.com/ (accessed on 1 January 2024).

102. Revelle, W. *psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research*; Northwestern University: Evanston, IL, USA, 2022. Available online: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psych (accessed on 1 January 2024).

103. Wickham, H. *ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis*; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2016; ISBN 978-3-319-24277-4. Available online: https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org (accessed on 1 January 2024).

104. Bates, D.; Mächler, M.; Bolker, B.; Walker, S. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. *J. Stat. Softw.* **2015**, *67*, 1–48. [CrossRef]

105. Peterson, R.A.; Cavanaugh, J.E. Ordered quantile normalization: A semiparametric transformation built for the cross-validation era. *J. Appl. Stat.* **2020**, *47*, 2312–2327. [CrossRef]

106. Partala, T.; Surakka, V. Pupil size variation as an indication of affective processing. *Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud.* **2003**, *59*, 185–198. [CrossRef]

107. Chattha, U.A.; Janjua, U.I.; Anwar, F.; Madni, T.M.; Cheema, M.F.; Janjua, S.I. Motion Sickness in Virtual Reality: An Empirical Evaluation. *IEEE Access* **2020**, *8*, 130486–130499. [CrossRef]

108. Bouchrika, I. Mobile vs Desktop Usage Statistics for 2023. Available online: https://research.com/software/mobile-vs-desktop-usage (accessed on 21 October 2023).

109. Soewardi, H.; Izzuddin, M.N. Study of Cybersickness on Non-Immersive Virtual Reality Using Smartphone. *Malays. J. Public Health Med.* **2020**, *20*, 88–93. [CrossRef]

110. Kemeny, A.; Chardonnet, J.-R.; Colombet, F. Visualization and Motion Systems. In *Getting Rid of Cybersickness: In Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality, and Simulators*; Kemeny, A., Chardonnet, J.-R., Colombet, F., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 63–91. ISBN 978-3-030-59342-1.

111. Keshavarz, B.; Saryazdi, R.; Campos, J.L.; Golding, J.F. Introducing the VIMSSQ: Measuring susceptibility to visually induced motion sickness. *Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet.* **2019**, *63*, 2267–2271. [CrossRef]

112. Grassini, S.; Laumann, K.; Luzi, A.K. Association of Individual Factors with Simulator Sickness and Sense of Presence in Virtual Reality Mediated by Head-Mounted Displays (HMDs). *Multimodal Technol. Interact.* **2021**, *5*, 7. [CrossRef]
113. Himmels, C.; Czupala, A.R.; Fahmüller, T.; Fuchs, B.; Hauf, L.; Heidler, L.; Riener, A. The Influence of Gaming Experience and Optic Flow on Simulator Sickness: Insights from a Driving Simulator Study. In Proceedings of the Adjunct Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '22), Seoul, Republic of Korea, 17–20 September 2022; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 149–152.

114. Krarup, K.B.; Krarup, H.B. The physiological and biochemical effects of gaming: A review. *Environ. Res.* **2020**, *184*, 109344.
[CrossRef]

115. Kühn, S.; Gallinat, J.; Mascherek, A. Effects of computer gaming on cognition, brain structure, and function: A critical reflection on existing literature. *Dialogues Clin. Neurosci.* **2019**, *21*, 319–330. [CrossRef]

116. Keshavarz, B.; Murovec, B.; Mohanathas, N.; Golding, J.F. The Visually Induced Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire (VIMSSQ): Estimating Individual Susceptibility to Motion Sickness-Like Symptoms When Using Visual Devices. *Hum. Factors* **2023**, *65*, 107–124. [CrossRef]

117. Cantor, J.; Engle, R.W.; Hamilton, G. Short-term memory, working memory, and verbal abilities: How do they relate? *Intelligence* **1991**, *15*, 229–246. [CrossRef]

118. Kail, R.; Hall, L.K. Distinguishing short-term memory from working memory. *Mem. Cogn.* **2001**, *29*, 1–9. [CrossRef]

119. Logie, R.H. The Functional Organization and Capacity Limits of Working Memory. *Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.* **2011**, *20*, 240–245.
[CrossRef]

120. Bigelow, R.T.; Agrawal, Y. Vestibular involvement in cognition: Visuospatial ability, attention, executive function, and memory. *J. Vestib. Res.* **2015**, *25*, 73–89. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

121. Waris, O.; Jaeggi, S.M.; Seitz, A.R.; Lehtonen, M.; Soveri, A.; Lukasik, K.M.; Söderström, U.; Hoffing, R.A.C.; Laine, M. Video gaming and working memory: A large-scale cross-sectional correlative study. *Comput. Hum. Behav.* **2019**, *97*, 94–103. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

122. Kazimoglu, C.; Bacon, L. An Analysis of a Video Game on Cognitive Abilities: A Study to Enhance Psychomotor Skills via Game-Play. *IEEE Access* **2020**, *8*, 110495–110510. [CrossRef]

123. Dye, M.W.G.; Green, C.S.; Bavelier, D. Increasing Speed of Processing With Action Video Games. *Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.* **2009**, *18*, 321–326. [CrossRef]

124. Kennedy, A.M.; Boyle, E.M.; Traynor, O.; Walsh, T.; Hill, A.D.K. Video Gaming Enhances Psychomotor Skills But Not Visuospatial and Perceptual Abilities in Surgical Trainees. *J. Surg. Educ.* **2011**, *68*, 414–420. [CrossRef]

125. Kowal, M.; Toth, A.J.; Exton, C.; Campbell, M.J. Different cognitive abilities displayed by action video gamers and non-gamers. *Comput. Hum. Behav.* **2018**, *88*, 255–262. [CrossRef]

126. Bisley, J.W. The neural basis of visual attention. *J. Physiol.* **2011**, *589*, 49–57. [CrossRef]

127. Klein, R.; Kingstone, A.; Pontefract, A. Orienting of Visual Attention. In *Eye Movements and Visual Cognition: Scene Perception and Reading*; Rayner, K., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1992; pp. 46–65. ISBN 978-1-4612-2852-3.

128. Napadow, V.; Sheehan, J.D.; Kim, J.; LaCount, L.T.; Park, K.; Kaptchuk, T.J.; Rosen, B.R.; Kuo, B. The Brain Circuitry Underlying the Temporal Evolution of Nausea in Humans. *Cereb. Cortex* **2013**, *23*, 806–813. [CrossRef]

129. Singh, P.; Yoon, S.S.; Kuo, B. Nausea: A review of pathophysiology and therapeutics. *Ther. Adv. Gastroenterol.* **2016**, *9*, 98–112.
[CrossRef]

130. Borecki, L.; Tolstych, K.; Pokorski, M. Computer Games and Fine Motor Skills. In *Respiratory Regulation—Clinical Advances*; Pokorski, M., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 343–348.

131. Gianferrara, P.G.; Betts, S.; Anderson, J.R. Cognitive & motor skill transfer across speeds: A video game study. *PLoS ONE* **2021**, *16*, e0258242. [CrossRef]

132. Geyer, D.J.; Biggs, A.T. The Persistent Issue of Simulator Sickness in Naval Aviation Training. *Aerosp. Med. Hum. Perform.* **2018**, *89*, 396–405. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

133. Palmisano, S.; Mursic, R.; Kim, J. Vection and cybersickness generated by head-and-display motion in the Oculus Rift. *Displays* **2017**, *46*, 1–8. [CrossRef]

134. Rebenitsch, L.; Owen, C. Review on cybersickness in applications and visual displays. *Virtual Real.* **2016**, *20*, 101–125. [CrossRef]

135. Jasper, A.; Sepich, N.C.; Gilbert, S.B.; Kelly, J.W.; Dorneich, M.C. Predicting cybersickness using individual and task characteristics. *Comput. Hum. Behav.* **2023**, *146*, 107800. [CrossRef]

**Disclaimer/Publisher's Note:** The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
113. Himmels, C.; Czupala, A.R.; Fahmüller, T.; Fuchs, B.; Hauf, L.; Heidler, L.; Riener, A. The Influence of Gaming Experience and Optic Flow on Simulator Sickness: Insights from a Driving Simulator Study. In Proceedings of the Adjunct Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '22), Seoul, Republic of Korea, 17–20 September 2022; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2022; pp. 149–152.

114. Krarup, K.B.; Krarup, H.B. The physiological and biochemical effects of gaming: A review. *Environ. Res.* **2020**, *184*, 109344.
[CrossRef]

115. Kühn, S.; Gallinat, J.; Mascherek, A. Effects of computer gaming on cognition, brain structure, and function: A critical reflection on existing literature. *Dialogues Clin. Neurosci.* **2019**, *21*, 319–330. [CrossRef]

116. Keshavarz, B.; Murovec, B.; Mohanathas, N.; Golding, J.F. The Visually Induced Motion Sickness Susceptibility Questionnaire (VIMSSQ): Estimating Individual Susceptibility to Motion Sickness-Like Symptoms When Using Visual Devices. *Hum. Factors* **2023**, *65*, 107–124. [CrossRef]

117. Cantor, J.; Engle, R.W.; Hamilton, G. Short-term memory, working memory, and verbal abilities: How do they relate? *Intelligence* **1991**, *15*, 229–246. [CrossRef]

118. Kail, R.; Hall, L.K. Distinguishing short-term memory from working memory. *Mem. Cogn.* **2001**, *29*, 1–9. [CrossRef]

119. Logie, R.H. The Functional Organization and Capacity Limits of Working Memory. *Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.* **2011**, *20*, 240–245.
[CrossRef]

120. Bigelow, R.T.; Agrawal, Y. Vestibular involvement in cognition: Visuospatial ability, attention, executive function, and memory. *J. Vestib. Res.* **2015**, *25*, 73–89. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

121. Waris, O.; Jaeggi, S.M.; Seitz, A.R.; Lehtonen, M.; Soveri, A.; Lukasik, K.M.; Söderström, U.; Hoffing, R.A.C.; Laine, M. Video gaming and working memory: A large-scale cross-sectional correlative study. *Comput. Hum. Behav.* **2019**, *97*, 94–103. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

122. Kazimoglu, C.; Bacon, L. An Analysis of a Video Game on Cognitive Abilities: A Study to Enhance Psychomotor Skills via Game-Play. *IEEE Access* **2020**, *8*, 110495–110510. [CrossRef]

123. Dye, M.W.G.; Green, C.S.; Bavelier, D. Increasing Speed of Processing With Action Video Games. *Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.* **2009**, *18*, 321–326. [CrossRef]

124. Kennedy, A.M.; Boyle, E.M.; Traynor, O.; Walsh, T.; Hill, A.D.K. Video Gaming Enhances Psychomotor Skills But Not Visuospatial and Perceptual Abilities in Surgical Trainees. *J. Surg. Educ.* **2011**, *68*, 414–420. [CrossRef]

125. Kowal, M.; Toth, A.J.; Exton, C.; Campbell, M.J. Different cognitive abilities displayed by action video gamers and non-gamers. *Comput. Hum. Behav.* **2018**, *88*, 255–262. [CrossRef]

126. Bisley, J.W. The neural basis of visual attention. *J. Physiol.* **2011**, *589*, 49–57. [CrossRef]

127. Klein, R.; Kingstone, A.; Pontefract, A. Orienting of Visual Attention. In *Eye Movements and Visual Cognition: Scene Perception and Reading*; Rayner, K., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1992; pp. 46–65. ISBN 978-1-4612-2852-3.

128. Napadow, V.; Sheehan, J.D.; Kim, J.; LaCount, L.T.; Park, K.; Kaptchuk, T.J.; Rosen, B.R.; Kuo, B. The Brain Circuitry Underlying the Temporal Evolution of Nausea in Humans. *Cereb. Cortex* **2013**, *23*, 806–813. [CrossRef]

129. Singh, P.; Yoon, S.S.; Kuo, B. Nausea: A review of pathophysiology and therapeutics. *Ther. Adv. Gastroenterol.* **2016**, *9*, 98–112.
[CrossRef]

130. Borecki, L.; Tolstych, K.; Pokorski, M. Computer Games and Fine Motor Skills. In *Respiratory Regulation—Clinical Advances*; Pokorski, M., Ed.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 343–348.

131. Gianferrara, P.G.; Betts, S.; Anderson, J.R. Cognitive & motor skill transfer across speeds: A video game study. *PLoS ONE* **2021**, *16*, e0258242. [CrossRef]

132. Geyer, D.J.; Biggs, A.T. The Persistent Issue of Simulator Sickness in Naval Aviation Training. *Aerosp. Med. Hum. Perform.* **2018**, *89*, 396–405. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

133. Palmisano, S.; Mursic, R.; Kim, J. Vection and cybersickness generated by head-and-display motion in the Oculus Rift. *Displays* **2017**, *46*, 1–8. [CrossRef]

134. Rebenitsch, L.; Owen, C. Review on cybersickness in applications and visual displays. *Virtual Real.* **2016**, *20*, 101–125. [CrossRef]

135. Jasper, A.; Sepich, N.C.; Gilbert, S.B.; Kelly, J.W.; Dorneich, M.C. Predicting cybersickness using individual and task characteristics. *Comput. Hum. Behav.* **2023**, *146*, 107800. [CrossRef]

**Disclaimer/Publisher's Note:** The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.