Which Reality Are We in? Deconstructing XR Terms and Taxonomies—Survey of Who Cares and Why It Matters

Despite the proliferation of Extended Reality (XR) across sectors such as education, healthcare, industry, and defense, the definitions and boundaries of XR—including Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), and Mixed Reality (MR)—remain inconsistent across disciplines. Evolving capabilities such as sensorimotor integration and multimodal interaction, have challenged the utility of foundational frameworks, such as the real-to-virtual continuum (Milgram & Kishino, 1994). This study explores the ontological ambiguity surrounding XR by gathering insights from stakeholders through a mixed-methods survey. Participants shared perspectives on preferred definitions, usage contexts, and challenges posed by inconsistent terminology. Findings reveal that definitional inconsistencies hinder cross-disciplinary communication, obscure vendor capabilities, and complicate collaboration across sectors. Our analysis highlights how XR concepts have evolved over time and identifies key gaps in existing taxonomies. Our findings underscore the need for a more robust, cross-disciplinary ontology to guide continued communication and innovation in XR.