This new book, Irresistible: the Rise of Addictive Technology, points to a challenge that may be hitting a tipping point. It is not a surprise that we find various of our tech-toys addictive in various ways. Nor is it surprising that there is a business incentive to have folks “hooked” on your toy rather than someone else’s. But … are we moving towards “maximally effective addiction?.” There is the traditional story of “the wire” that allows rats/people to stimulate brain pleasure centers can result in addictive, potentially fatal activity. Presumably, to the extent possible from a basis of external sensory input, technology will move towards this point. With the addition of fairly comprehensive individual analysis, AI driven analysis and expanded virtual reality capabilities will approach the maximally effective endpoint. The only business constraint may be the loss of a revenue generating consumer as a result. Is this the direction we are headed? And what might prevent our reaching that point?
The Jan. 4, 2016 Wall St Journal has an article “VR Growth Sparks Questions About Effects on Body, Mind” pointing out, as prior publications have, that 2016 is likely to be the Year of VR. The U.S. Consumer Electronics Show is starting this week in Las Vegas, where many neat, new and re-packaged concepts will be strongly promoted.
The article points to issues of physical health – nasua is one well documented potential factor. But work has been taking place on residual effects (how soon should you drive after VR?), how long to remain immersed before you ‘surface’, etc. Perhaps the key consideration is degree to which our bodies/brains accept the experiences of VR as real — altering our thinking and behaviour. (Prof. Jeremy Bailenson, director of Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab confirms this is one impact.)
All of the pundits point out that every new technology has it’s potential uses/abuses. But that does not excuse the specific considerations that might apply to VR. A point raised in the article “Scares in VR are borderline immoral”. There is a line of technology from “watching” to “first person” to “immersion” that should be getting our attention. The dispute over “children impacted by what they watch on TV”, moving to first-person shooter video games, to VR is sure to occur. But in VR, you can be the victim as well. I first encountered the consideration of the after effects of rape in a video game environment at an SSIT conference some years ago. Even with the third party perspective in that case, the victim was traumatized. No doubt VR will provide a higher impact. There are no-doubt lesser acts that can be directed at a VR participant that will have greater impact in VR than they might with less immersive technology.
This is the time to start sorting out scenarios, possible considerations for vendors of technology, aps and content, and also to watch for the quite predictable unexpected effects. Do you have any ‘predictions’ for 2016 and the Year of VR?