## 4 Discussion  
IVR exercise has been linked to a variety of benefits. IVR exercise has been associated with reductions in fatigue, stress, and depression, as well as increases in tranquility and quality of life [26]. In addition, the capacity of IVR exergaming to be physically demanding while enjoyable allows it to be an effective and engaging form of exercise [27]. These advantages, when combined with generally high satisfaction and usage scores, have revealed the potential for IVR to vastly improve health and well-being [28]. Despite these advantages, there is a scarcity of studies testing the efficacy of deception via IVR exercise across different modalities. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first of its kind to examine the effects of IVR in conjunction with treadmill speed deception. The results of the present study support the first of our hypotheses, as the mean RPE scores corresponding to the IVR trials were significantly lower than those from the non-IVR trials at 3.5 and 3.7 mph (7.4 and 7.6 versus 8.6 and 9.5; \(p\) < 0.002, respectively). This finding is consistent with a deceptive study using a training bike conducted by [PERSON] et al., which found that the manipulation of visual and haptic cues could allow for an increase in the user's speed by 15.2% without the user's awareness [29]. Similarly, in regard to resistance training, both a 5% and 10% deceptive increase in loading while leg pressing have been shown to elicit nearly identical strength measures without negatively affecting physical self-efficacy [30]. In contrast to our results, however, [PERSON] et al. found no difference in RPE between exergaming and matched-intensity treadmill walking [31]. An important distinction between both studies is the use of immersive VR versus two-dimensional, VR-only. Being engaged in an IVR environment may heighten dissociation and/or distract the user from the perceived effort of the exercise. The second of our hypotheses was partially supported. Only the HR response during the trials at 3.7 mph was lower in the IVR group than the non-IVR group (107 bpm versus 115 bpm; \(p\) < 0.049, respectively). Little research has assessed heart rate trends in protocols that integrate deception and exergaming together, but there is a limited amount of each in isolation. In an IVR exergaming study with geriatric participants, mean HR measurements \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**Non-IVR**} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{**IVR**} \\
**Deceptive** & **3.3** & **3.5** & **3.7** & **3.3** & **3.5** & **3.7** \\
**Treadmill Speed (mph)** & 111 & 110 & 115 & 107 & 105 & 107 \\ HR (\(\pm\)SD) (bpm) & (13) & (16) & (16) & (14) & (10) & (10) \\ \hline Borg RPE (\(\pm\)SD) & 8.5 & 8.6 & 9.0 & 7.5 & 7.4 & 7.6 \\  & (1.5) & (1.1) & (1.3) & (0.5) & (0.5) & (0.6) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Mean heart rate and Borg RPE scores corresponding to deceptive treadmill speed in the non-immersive virtual reality (IVR) and IVR trials. increased for three out of four individuals between two different training sessions [32]. Furthermore, a comparison between four exergames found that 75% of the exergames produced a lower perceived exertion than actual exertion based on their average heart rate as a percentage of their maximum heart rate (66%, 78%, and 55% of maximum heart rate, respectively) [33]. Conversely, in a deceptive treadmill and cycling study, lower heart rate measurements were observed during the condition in which the endpoint was not specified compared to when an endpoint was predetermined [34]. Further research is warranted to evaluate trends in HR during deceptive training in order to provide informed exercise recommendations, such as appropriate training HR zones, for IVR exergaming users. The findings of the present study may be attributed to several different factors; first, the preservation of teleoanticipation.