READ / RESEARCH · BIOADAPTIVE VR AND PERSONALISED FEEDBACK

This book brings together research about virtual, augmented and mixed reality. The four chapters I read explore how virtual experiences could respond to body signals, how people understand that feedback, and how researchers assess relaxation.

What I wanted to understand

I read these chapters to explore what happens after a wearable collects physiological data. For my project, sensing needs to lead to something useful: a response that the person understands, can choose and can adjust. Although these studies focus on VR, several of their principles could inform a wider wearable system.

Three ways a system could respond

The most useful chapter was MATE-VR, a proposed system for supporting stress regulation in isolated environments such as Antarctic research stations. Its structure connects collecting body signals, interpreting changes and adapting the experience. It describes a system under development, so I am using it as a design framework rather than evidence of a proven intervention.

My sticky notes focused on three proposed responses (Muñoz et al., 2026, p. 348).

Environmental modulation means adjusting visual complexity, movement, lighting and sound. This helped me think about how support could change the sensory demands of an experience. Within an airport, my project would have limited control over the surrounding environment, but it could adjust the feedback delivered through a personal wearable.

Pacing and task demand means changing the speed or difficulty of an interaction. For my project, this raises questions about whether guidance could become shorter, slower or less frequent when someone needs more processing time. This would need careful testing: additional instructions could themselves become another demand.

Biofeedback representation means communicating physiological changes through subtle cues. This could help someone notice a change without repeatedly checking a screen. The design challenge is deciding what that cue means and how much information it should communicate.

A cue that tells someone their signals have changed serves a different purpose from a response intended to help them regulate. my project needs to make that distinction clear.

Feedback needs to make sense to the person

The breathing-exercise chapter showed why the meaning of feedback cannot be assumed. In a study involving 62 participants, changes in colour and weather were interpreted differently. Weather with sound was often preferred, but people did not consistently agree on whether particular weather changes represented a positive or negative state (Moser et al., 2026, pp. 325, 333).

For my project, this suggests that a designer’s idea of “calming” needs to be tested with users. A sound, rhythm or visual change could feel reassuring to one person and unpleasant to another.

The study used predefined visual changes rather than live physiological feedback. Its contribution is therefore about how feedback is perceived, rather than demonstrating that a working bioresponsive system reduces stress.

Connecting wearable data with individual responses

Another note I made was about the Empatica E4 wrist wearable. The multisensory study used it to record electrodermal activity, heart rate and skin temperature alongside gaze and interaction data. This provided a practical example of a wearable supplying information to a separate experience (Yi and Kang, 2026, p. 421).

Participants showed different physiological responses to the sensory elements they attended to. Combining gaze and physical interaction data also produced stronger predictive relationships with physiological measures than gaze alone. However, this was an exploratory study with only eleven participants, and its findings do not establish a reliable method of identifying autistic sensory overload.

The useful principle is to investigate patterns within the individual. MATE-VR similarly proposes using personal baselines, accounting for movement and pausing adaptation when signals are unreliable.

Reading the evidence critically

The chapters offer different kinds of evidence: design preferences, a proposed adaptive system, an exploratory multisensory study and an EEG evaluation. I need to preserve those distinctions when using them in my project.

The EEG chapter reported positive experiences, but its headline alpha-power results had p-values of 0.073 and 0.055, above the conventional 0.05 threshold. I would treat these as preliminary findings rather than confirmation of a therapeutic effect (Zhang et al., 2026, pp. 440–441). None of these chapters establishes effectiveness for autistic adults travelling through airports.

What I am taking forward

These chapters helped me see that the response, its timing and its communication all need designing together. My next step is to apply that thinking to tactile, pressure, thermal and audio interventions, asking what each response offers and how the person retains control.

MATE-VR’s proposed controls allow users to pause sensing or end a session. That principle is directly relevant to my project’s emphasis on independence and autonomy.

A responsive system should remain understandable and optional. The design needs to consider what changes, when it changes, how the person understands it and how they can stop it.

Sources

Selected chapters from Chen, J. Y. C. and Fragomeni, G. (eds.) (2026), Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality, Part I, LNCS 16717.

• Moser, M., Scherer, C. and Keller, T. (2026). ‘Evaluating Visual Realism and Biofeedback Metaphors for VR-Based Breathing Exercises’, pp. 325–340. Chapter DOI.
• Muñoz et al. (2026). ‘MATE-VR: A Bioadaptive VR System Concept and Field Roadmap for Stress Regulation in Antarctic ICE Environments’, pp. 341–358. Chapter DOI.
• Yi, Y. J. and Kang, Z. (2026). ‘Multimodal Analysis Framework for Sensory Stimuli and Physiological Calm in Virtual Reality Multisensory Environments’, pp. 415–429. Chapter DOI.
• Zhang, Z., Liu, J., Li, Y. and Guo, Y. (2026). ‘Utilizing EEG Data Analysis to Evaluate the Efficacy of a Novel Therapeutic System Employing Stylized Plus Physics-Simulated Virtual Reality Healing Environments’, pp. 430–447. Chapter DOI.