Ethical Considerations

The growing realism and widespread adoption of virtual reality (VR) and augmented reality (AR), collectively referred to as extended reality (XR), have raised significant ethical questions regarding user behaviour, social impact, and privacy. Slater et al. (2020) explore these challenges, noting that as XR environments become increasingly lifelike, they create both opportunities and risks for users and society at large.

Among the potential benefits, XR offers therapeutic applications such as the treatment of phobias, exposure therapy, and pain management. Realistic simulations also have clear utility in training, particularly in medicine, disaster response, and education, where the ability to rehearse complex scenarios in safe, controlled environments can significantly improve learning outcomes. Greater realism, in turn, enhances immersion and may increase the efficacy of these applications by making them more believable and impactful.

However, alongside these benefits are numerous ethical concerns. One major issue concerns the morality of actions within virtual environments. Behaviours that are considered unacceptable in the real world—such as violence or unethical treatment of others—can be enacted in XR, raising questions about whether such actions should be regulated or whether they have psychological consequences for users. Another set of concerns relates to psychological effects, as highly immersive experiences may cause confusion between virtual and real environments, produce emotional after-effects, or contribute to phenomena such as body dysmorphia. Vulnerable populations, including children and individuals with mental health conditions, may be particularly susceptible, as they may struggle to distinguish real from virtual experiences. Privacy is an additional area of risk. XR devices routinely collect detailed personal data, including body movements, preferences, and biometric information, creating opportunities for misuse, hacking, or surveillance.

The notion of superrealism intensifies these ethical dilemmas. As XR approaches levels of realism indistinguishable from the real world, users may face difficulties separating virtual from physical environments. This can lead to behavioural challenges, false memories, and even altered perceptions of race, gender, or identity, with the potential to exacerbate societal biases or create new ethical problems.

Other dimensions of XR ethics have emerged in the literature. Cybersickness, for example, is a persistent issue explored by Gallagher and Ferrè, who analyse it from the perspective of multisensory integration. Cybersickness occurs when visual signals indicating motion conflict with vestibular and proprioceptive cues suggesting the body is stationary. Symptoms, which include nausea, dizziness, and disorientation, differ from traditional motion sickness in intensity and underlying mechanisms. Theories such as Reason and Brand’s Neural Mismatch Theory and Riccio and Stoffregen’s Postural Instability Theory suggest that cybersickness results from the brain’s difficulty in integrating conflicting sensory information. While some users adapt over time, susceptibility varies with factors such as age, gender, and prior motion sickness experience. Strategies to mitigate symptoms include reducing system lag, optimising tracking, introducing stable visual references, or even incorporating vestibular stimulation.

Ethical questions also surround the use of avatars. The concept of Transformed Social Interaction (TSI) highlights how digital representations can be altered to change communication dynamics. Avatars may be designed to enhance social influence by adjusting gaze, mimicry, or nonverbal cues, or they may allow individuals to present themselves in ways that align more closely with their identity. While such transformations can improve engagement in educational or professional contexts and promote inclusivity, they also raise ethical issues of manipulation, authenticity, and trust. The Proteus Effect, in which a person’s behaviour is influenced by the characteristics of their avatar—for example, adopting greater confidence when represented by a more attractive figure—further complicates the psychological and ethical implications of digital identity.

Privacy is another pressing concern, particularly in light of the emergence of the Metaverse. Warin and Reinhardt (2022) argue that XR devices such as headsets, AR applications, and mixed-reality glasses collect vast amounts of sensitive data, including biometric information like gaze patterns, body posture, and spatial mapping data. This creates risks such as spatial inference attacks, where personal environments can be reconstructed from device data, potentially exposing users’ locations or behaviours. Many XR devices lack robust privacy mechanisms, even though they employ features such as access control or multi-factor authentication. The authors propose the development of cross-platform privacy-preserving tools that would allow users greater control over their data while addressing the so-called “privacy paradox”—the tendency for users to disclose more information when they feel they are in control.