Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Jan 14.
Published in final edited form as: Behav Res Ther. 2021 Oct 6;147:103984. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2021.103984

Table 4.

Comparison presence and cybersickness with prior data.

Current study (n = 44) Regenbrecht and Schubert (2002)
Mostajeran et al. (2020)
Current study vs. Regenbrecht and Schubert (2002) Current study vs. Mostajeran et al. (2020)
(n = 56) (n = 24)

Domains of Presence M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) p g p g
Spatial presence 3.49 (0.81) 2.92 (1.16) 4.02 (3.80) .002 0.56 .513 −0.19
Involvement 3.84 (1.05) 3.38 (1.42) 3.43 (2.26) .062 0.37 .892 0.04
Realness 2.67 (0.75) 1.86 (1.15) 3.13 (1.90) .008 0.83 .373 0.25











Current study (n = 44) Bouchard et al. (2009) (n = 157) Kim et al. (2017) (n = 52) Current study vs. Bouchard et al. (2009) Current study vs. Kim et al. (2017)






Cybersickness M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) p g p g
Total score 16.39 (11.51) 36.27 (31.46) 16.10 (15.67) <.001 −0.84 .918 0.02

Note. Presence was measured using the iGroup Presence Questionnaire (IPQ), and cybersickness was assessed with the Simulation Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ).