This review analyzes 94 articles in an attempt to define the concept of presence in virtual reality (VR). Two types of data were examined: physiological variables and questionnaires, which were used in 85% of the selected articles. The physiological measurements focused mainly on head movements, as well as electromyographic and electrocardiographic activity. Over time, a gradual decrease in the use of questionnaires is noted, with a growing preference for physiological markers to define presence in VR.
This approach captures the complexity of the subject’s experience, which includes cognitive, emotional, and physical responses. The review raises two issues: none of the recorded neurophysiological variables can be considered specific to presence in VR, and sample sizes are often small. Larger-scale prospective studies are needed to better define presence during immersion.
Why it’s worth covering: 94-study review showing the field shifting from questionnaires to physiological markers (head movement, ECG/EMG) — and warning that no physiological signal is presence-specific. Strong candidate for a methods-focused summary.