The Effects of Competition on Exercise Intensity and the User Experience of Exercise during Virtual Reality Bicycling for Young Adults

Abstract

Background: Regular moderate-vigorous intensity exercise is recommended for adults as it can improve longevity and reduce health risks associated with a sedentary lifestyle. However, there are barriers to achieving intense exercise that may be addressed using virtual reality (VR) as a tool to promote exercise intensity and adherence, particularly through visual feedback and competition. The purpose of this work is to compare visual feedback and competition within fully immersive VR to enhance exercise intensity and user experience of exercise for young adults; and to describe and compare visual attention during each of the conditions.

Methods: Young adults (21-34 years old) bicycled in three 5 min VR conditions (visual feedback, self-competition, and competition against others). Exercise intensity (cycling cadence and % of maximum heart rate) and visual attention (derived from a wearable eye tracking sensor) were measured continuously. User experience was measured by an intrinsic motivation questionnaire, perceived effort, and participant preference. A repeated-measures ANOVA with paired t-test post hoc tests was conducted to detect differences between conditions.

Results: Participants exercised at a higher intensity and had higher intrinsic motivation in the two competitive conditions compared to visual feedback. Further, participants preferred the competitive conditions and only reached a vigorous exercise intensity during self-competition. Visual exploration was higher in visual feedback compared to self-competition.

Conclusions: For young adults bicycling in VR, competition promoted higher exercise intensity and motivation compared to visual feedback.

Keywords: aerobic exercise; bicycling; competition; enjoyment; eye-tracking; motivation; virtual reality; visual attention; visual feedback; wearable sensors.

Figure 1

The experimental setup is shown with markers to denote how outcome measures were collected in the protocol. (1) Eye-tracking collected as a surrogate of visual attention using sensors embedded within the HTC Vive Pro Eye head-mounted display. (2) Heart rate measured using the Polar optical sensor. (3) Cadence measured with the Wahoo RPM sensor attached to the pedal crankshaft. (4) Perception of effort measured using a virtual Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE) scale administered in the simulation and visible when the participant looked downward at the bicycle handlebars. The RPE scale could be toggled on and off by the protocol administrator.

Figure 2

A flow diagram of the simulation, with the control panel shown on the left and the participant’s view of the simulation within the head-mounted display shown on the right. Panel (A): The pre-trial start screen where participant information is added and the protocol is selected. A vision test is shown to optimize the virtual reality headset visual settings for each user. Heart rate (HR) and cadence (revolutions per minute—RPM) are shown. Pressing the “Start” button (denoted with an asterisk to make the user interface more user-friendly) transitions the scene to the view shown in Panel (B). Panel (B): The participant now sees the virtual reality bicycling environment. The baseline cadence is manually entered into the text field and updates when the “Submit” button is pressed. After the baseline cadence is collected, the “Start” button is pressed and the simulation begins moving. Panel (C): At the midpoint and endpoint of the trial, the participant is instructed to look down at the handlebars and report their rating of perceived exertion score. Panel (D): When the participant finishes the trial, a box appears, letting them know the trial is complete. Fireworks and a finish line appear in the distance, and when the participant pedals past the finish line, the simulation ends.

Figure 3

An overview of the study protocol in a single session. There are three trials: competition (self or others) and feedback. Single cohort, repeated measures. All participants complete all 3 conditions, which includes the 2 competitive trials (self-competition and competition against others) and visual feedback. The asterisk denotes that the 3 conditions were counter-balanced, described further in the manuscript text.

Figure 4

Breakdown of the virtual environment to categorize and analyze eye movements in VR. NW is the northwest region, NM is the north middle region, NE is the northeast region, MW is the middle west region, ME is the middle east region, SW is the southwest region, SM is the south middle region, and SE is the southeast region. The yellow square represents gazes focused on the middle of the road. The red circle in each box represents the location of the measured gaze.

Figure 5

Exercise intensity in three conditions. The asterisk indicates statistically significant differences in each competitive condition compared to visual feedback (p-values < 0.0167). Cardiovascular intensity was higher in competition against others compared to visual feedback (t(24) = 4.74; p < 0.001) and in self-competition compared to visual feedback (W = 284; p < 0.001) Neuromuscular intensity was higher in competition against others compared to visual feedback (t(24) = 6.04; p < 0.001) and in self-competition compared to visual feedback (t(24) = 7.53; p < 0.001).

Figure 6

Visual attention in three conditions. Task focus is operationally defined as the percentage of valid gazes falling in the center square. FOV stands for the field of view.