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

Olga Iarygina; Kasper Hornbæk; Aske Mottelson

doi:10.1145/3706598.3713506

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

Olga Iarygina, Kasper Hornbæk, Aske Mottelson

Human-Centred Computing

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Article in proceedings › Research › peer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

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.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	CHI 2025 - Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
Number of pages	19
Publisher	Association for Computing Machinery
Publication date	2025
Article number	369
ISBN (Electronic)	9798400713941
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713506
Publication status	Published - 2025
Event	2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2025 - Yokohama, Japan Duration: 26 Apr 2025 → 1 May 2025

Conference

Conference	2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2025
Country/Territory	Japan
City	Yokohama
Period	26/04/2025 → 01/05/2025
Sponsor	ACM SIGCHI

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).

Keywords

body ownership illusions
confounds
embodiment
experiments
validity
virtual reality

Access to Document

10.1145/3706598.3713506Licence: CC BY

FulltextFinal published version, 4.18 MBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended. / Iarygina, Olga ; Hornbæk, Kasper; Mottelson, Aske.
CHI 2025 - Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, 2025. 369.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Article in proceedings › Research › peer-review

Iarygina, O , Hornbæk, K & Mottelson, A 2025, Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended. in CHI 2025 - Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems., 369, Association for Computing Machinery, 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2025, Yokohama, Japan, 26/04/2025. https://doi.org/10.1145/3706598.3713506

@inproceedings{b03f4b2b07ca4f91a55663dedf574db1,

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

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.",

keywords = "body ownership illusions, confounds, embodiment, experiments, validity, virtual reality",

author = "Olga Iarygina and Kasper Hornb{\ae}k and Aske Mottelson",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2025 Copyright held by the owner/author(s).; 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2025 ; Conference date: 26-04-2025 Through 01-05-2025",

year = "2025",

doi = "10.1145/3706598.3713506",

language = "English",

booktitle = "CHI 2025 - Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems",

publisher = "Association for Computing Machinery",

address = "United States",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Does Random Movements mean Random Results? Why Asynchrony in Experiments on Body Ownership does not Work as Intended

AU - Iarygina, Olga

AU - Hornbæk, Kasper

AU - Mottelson, Aske

PY - 2025

Y1 - 2025

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - body ownership illusions

KW - confounds

KW - embodiment

KW - experiments

KW - validity

KW - virtual reality

U2 - 10.1145/3706598.3713506

DO - 10.1145/3706598.3713506

M3 - Article in proceedings

AN - SCOPUS:105005721021

BT - CHI 2025 - Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

PB - Association for Computing Machinery

T2 - 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI 2025

Y2 - 26 April 2025 through 1 May 2025

ER -