Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended

Effects of embodying virtual avatars are routinely validated experimentally by comparing synchronous and asynchronous movements between virtual and real bodies. This experimental paradigm, however, lacks justification, validation, and standardization. Asynchrony is implemented in numerous ways, such as through delayed, dislocated, or prerecorded movements, and these may impact embodiment and user experience distinctively. An online study ($N = 202$) revealed that variations of asynchrony cause disparate responses to embodiment and user experience, with prerecorded movements distorting embodiment the most. A think-aloud study ($N = 16$) revealed that asynchronous conditions lead to peculiar and oftentimes negative experiences. Furthermore, asynchronous conditions in some cases maintain, rather than break the body ownership illusion, as participants imitate the virtual body. Our results show that asynchrony in experiments on embodiment entails profound validity issues and should therefore be used with caution.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Published
2025-04-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713506
Primary Topic
Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended

Kasper Hornbæk, Olga Iarygina, Aske Mottelson
Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
article

Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended

Kasper Hornbæk, Olga Iarygina, Aske Mottelson
article en

Abstract

Effects of embodying virtual avatars are routinely validated experimentally by comparing synchronous and asynchronous movements between virtual and real bodies. This experimental paradigm, however, lacks justification, validation, and standardization. Asynchrony is implemented in numerous ways, such as through delayed, dislocated, or prerecorded movements, and these may impact embodiment and user experience distinctively. An online study ($N = 202$) revealed that variations of asynchrony cause disparate responses to embodiment and user experience, with prerecorded movements distorting embodiment the most. A think-aloud study ($N = 16$) revealed that asynchronous conditions lead to peculiar and oftentimes negative experiences. Furthermore, asynchronous conditions in some cases maintain, rather than break the body ownership illusion, as participants imitate the virtual body. Our results show that asynchrony in experiments on embodiment entails profound validity issues and should therefore be used with caution.

University of Copenhagen (DK), IT University of Copenhagen (DK)
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended — Kasper Hornbæk, Olga Iarygina, et al. · (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS