Research

Paper

TESTING February 26, 2026

Too Immersive for the Field? Addressing Safety Risks in Extended Reality User Studies

Authors

Tanja Kojić, Sara Srebot, Maurizio Vergari, Mirta Moslavac, Maximilian Warsinke, Sebastian Möller, Lea Skorin-Kapov, Jan-Niklas Voigt-Antons

Abstract

Extended Reality (XR) technologies are increasingly tested outside the lab, in homes, schools, and public spaces. While this shift enables more realistic user insights, it also introduces safety challenges that are often overlooked. Physical risks, psychological distress, and accessibility issues can be increased in field studies and unsupervised testing, such as at home or crowdsourced trials. Without clear instructions, safety decisions are left to individual researchers, raising questions of responsibility and consistency. This position paper outlines key safety risks in XR user testing beyond the lab and calls for practical strategies that are needed to help researchers run XR studies in a safe and inclusive way across different environments.

Metadata

arXiv ID: 2602.23497
Provider: ARXIV
Primary Category: cs.HC
Published: 2026-02-26
Fetched: 2026-03-02 06:04

Related papers

Raw Data (Debug)
{
  "raw_xml": "<entry>\n    <id>http://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23497v1</id>\n    <title>Too Immersive for the Field? Addressing Safety Risks in Extended Reality User Studies</title>\n    <updated>2026-02-26T21:09:42Z</updated>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.23497v1' rel='alternate' type='text/html'/>\n    <link href='https://arxiv.org/pdf/2602.23497v1' rel='related' title='pdf' type='application/pdf'/>\n    <summary>Extended Reality (XR) technologies are increasingly tested outside the lab, in homes, schools, and public spaces. While this shift enables more realistic user insights, it also introduces safety challenges that are often overlooked. Physical risks, psychological distress, and accessibility issues can be increased in field studies and unsupervised testing, such as at home or crowdsourced trials. Without clear instructions, safety decisions are left to individual researchers, raising questions of responsibility and consistency. This position paper outlines key safety risks in XR user testing beyond the lab and calls for practical strategies that are needed to help researchers run XR studies in a safe and inclusive way across different environments.</summary>\n    <category scheme='http://arxiv.org/schemas/atom' term='cs.HC'/>\n    <published>2026-02-26T21:09:42Z</published>\n    <arxiv:comment>Paper presented at the Mensch und Computer 2025 (MuC 2025)</arxiv:comment>\n    <arxiv:primary_category term='cs.HC'/>\n    <author>\n      <name>Tanja Kojić</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Sara Srebot</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Maurizio Vergari</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Mirta Moslavac</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Maximilian Warsinke</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Sebastian Möller</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Lea Skorin-Kapov</name>\n    </author>\n    <author>\n      <name>Jan-Niklas Voigt-Antons</name>\n    </author>\n    <arxiv:doi>10.18420/muc2025-mci-ws13-231</arxiv:doi>\n    <link href='https://doi.org/10.18420/muc2025-mci-ws13-231' rel='related' title='doi'/>\n  </entry>"
}