The aim of this module is to support Research Ethics Committee Member in learning about, and reflecting upon, the ethics issues associated with the development and use of extended reality. '''Learning outcomes''' At the end of this module, learners will be able to: *Consider the primary ethical issues related to the development and use of XR technologies. *Outline the challenges related to privacy and personal data processing for XR technologies. *Identify the implications for energy and resource consumption in relation to the development and use of XR technologies. *Access guidelines and further resources for ethics assessment of XR research and development.
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERY9413b8e4faeb6bf08875c8afe50f29f7
-Has subobject::Instruction:922b5e03-1af5-44dd-851c-81c988c8345f
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERY1de949eb80216d58628b462d6dca7609
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERY074ebe0ff71979343829ffd3ee754b93
Has subobject.Guide Step Element::Instruction:922b5e03-1af5-44dd-851c-81c988c8345f +
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERY5de867529cba7d0613c9828ed609d5a7
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERYaf04bf707b774fe4e236f210df83ed3d
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERY49d551beab5b34e9901f78240606150b
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# QUERY418887a1268132b67a74d58fb9b9f272
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# 604746579b0b29eee1bbab9129230733
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# 61eed389c9e402bddd2cc540f32a9e85
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# c4b7503ca58095119b82bf8ea9e56875
Extended Reality: Ethics Issues# 7c89675ce38f5aeee7f73e73f4c4fdbf
A private technology company is collaborating with a team of university researchers, to design and develop a VR application, that will provide therapy for individuals with social anxiety disorder. Social anxiety disorder is characterized by an overwhelming fear of social situations, so that even everyday activities (like shopping, going to work or speaking on the phone) can cause great distress. The researchers intend to create immersive virtual environments where users can practice social interactions in realistic scenarios, such as job interviews, public speaking, or social gatherings.The VR therapy aims to help users overcome their anxiety by gradually exposing them to challenging situations in a controlled and supportive environment. Imagine that you are being invited to be a participant in this study. What concerns might you have? Take a few minutes to put yourself in the shoes of the participant, and think about the concerns that they might have. Then check against the primary ethics issues that are identified below. '''Feedback''' This brief scenario highlights some of the ethical issues that need to be considered when research involves a VR application. These issues can have impacts at many levels, from personal through to societal and environmental levels. In the rest of this module, we consider this along with the primary ethical issues in more detail.
An Example Project: Addressing Social Anxiety Disorder Through VR
The primary issues related to Extended Reality data processing concern privacy and confidentiality, data security and breaches, the volume of data extracted, and the lack of clarity around the sharing of information. '''Feedback''' XR platforms and applications can collect many different types of personal data from users. This includes biometric information (such as facial expressions or eye movements), location data and device identifiers, as well as potentially sensitive content from personal conversations, or confidential information that is shared within virtual environments. As the technology develops, so new types of data are being processed. For instance, eye tracking technology has the potential to gather highly sensitive data about individuals, including their gaze patterns, attentional focus, and emotional responses. This can be used to reveal personal preferences (including sensitive areas like sexual preferences), and certain health conditions, like autism and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Aside from the processing of personal data, other privacy matters concern the use of specific applications such as telemedicine: (particularly regarding the confidentiality of medical information) the potential use of brain data, data collection for industry purposes, and issues around governmental surveillance. Users need to be informed about the types of data collected, the purposes for which it will be used, and any third parties with whom it may be shared. Informed consent from users may be needed, to ensure that they understand and agree to the terms of data collection and usage within XR environments. Additionally, users should have control over their privacy settings and preferences, allowing them to adjust the settings, manage data sharing permissions, and delete or anonymize their data as wanted. But user consent and control may not always be possible. For instance, AR applications in public spaces raise concerns about reasonable expectations of privacy as they process and aggregate data about a user's broad surroundings in real time. This information gathering may require special consideration for bystander privacy, especially when government and law enforcement agencies use the technology. Regardless of the setting, XR developers and platform operators must comply with relevant privacy laws and regulations, such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, or the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) in the United States. This includes providing users with rights to access, rectify, and delete their personal data, as well as implementing mechanisms for data portability and transparency.
While the use of XR offers many potential benefits (for example, in training, design, or surgical planning), it also presents potential risks to health and wellbeing. Furthermore, given that the technology is relatively new, the long-term impacts upon physical health and wellbeing are not yet well understood or evidenced.
The use of XR also poses risks to mental health and wellbeing, inducing new problems and/or exacerbating existing concerns. Psychological impacts, including addiction and the need for a resting period after extended XR use, underscore the mental health dimensions associated with immersive technologies. However, it must be stressed that many of the alleged risks to mental health and wellbeing are currently tentative. Being a fairly new field of application and research, the evidence for harms and benefits is relatively scant. Consequently, it is difficult to predict who precisely is at risk of harm, in what circumstances, and how this is best addressed. Nevertheless, adherence to the precautionary principle would entail that proactive measures to prevent harm are taken, even in the absence of conclusive scientific evidence. Click on the images to read more about some of the primary concerns for mental health and wellbeing that have been identified to date. From a psychological perspective, there is ongoing debate about the welfare of children using immersive technologies. Children are identified as a highly vulnerable group and, as this module shows, there are many potential harms. Additionally, the long-term impacts upon psychological and emotional development are unknown. They necessitate careful examination to ensure the healthy growth and development of young XR users.
Moral equivalence in the context of VR and XR refers to the comparison of ethical behaviours and actions in digital environments with those in the real world. It raises questions about whether actions taken in virtual spaces—such as violence, harassment, or manipulation—should be judged or treated with the same moral standards as in physical reality. This concept highlights the challenge of defining ethical responsibility in immersive, simulated environments. In this expert interview, Alexi Grinbaum discusses moral equivalence, the potential impact on the wellbeing of users of VR and XR, and on wider society. We wrote an article with a colleague about what we call moral equivalence between virtual worlds and material worlds. Now, what do we mean by that? In the material world, we have thoughts, feelings, emotions. In the virtual world, these are all imitated through computation by avatars. So, an avatar doesn't have thoughts or emotions, but it appears to having them. It creates an illusion in us humans, that if you meet an avatar in the virtual world, then this avatar may be happy or mad at us or, you know, or maybe thirsty. But of course, an avatar is never really hungry or thirsty. But these projections, these, you know, feelings by projection, these are illusions because, of course, behind there is just digital computation. But we feel that they somehow make something to us. So, they are kind of real to us through the relation that we establish with these avatars as we interact with them. So, the question, the deep question is, these feelings by projection, these emotions by projection, they can go very far, responsibility by projection, crime and punishment by projection. When they do something to us through this relation, is that the same? Is it equivalent to what is happening in the material world? If there is an avatar that does something nasty, or something very nice to us in the virtual world and we feel for it. I mean, we do have feelings. Do these feelings matter as much as feelings in the material world? That's the question of equivalence. And it's a dilemma. We can't really solve it here and now. We can't say yes or no because there are arguments for and against. But this is a deep philosophical and ethical dilemma of our relation to these non-material entities because they do something very real to us. Again, real, not in the sense of material, but in the sense of feeling real. Virtual worlds are part of our reality. So how do we live with that? Do we need societal rules? Do we need laws? Do we need regulation? Do we let everyone decide for themselves or should society decide? Should a parliament decide? These are the big questions which all follow from this fundamental ethical dilemma, the question of equivalence, which doesn't have a simple solution.
Here are some of the many forms that virtual harassment can take. For each of the following, match the type of harassment to the description. Instances of harassment, hate speech, violent content, and XR pornography underscore the challenges surrounding user dignity and respect within virtual environments. For instance, virtual harassment can have serious consequences for users that extend beyond the virtual environment, including emotional distress, anxiety, depression, and in extreme cases, suicide. Researchers and ethics experts need to be aware of the potential for harassment in virtual spaces, to ensure that measures are taken to protect potential users from harm.
To address virtual harassment in VR environments, developers and platform operators can implement various measures.
While the aims of the research projects that you encounter are likely to be positive and beneficial, it is essential to recognise that the growing use of XR technologies opens new opportunities for criminal behaviour. Criminal behaviour might take the form of cybercrimes. Cybercriminals might exploit vulnerabilities in XR software or networks to steal personal information, financial data, or intellectual property. XR technologies might also be exploited for fraudulent activities and scams. Fraudulent activities could include deceptive advertising, phishing schemes, or through XR-enabled communication channels. Crimes can also be conducted in the virtual world, for example, rape or other forms of virtual assault/violence on an avatar, which, given the bond between a person and their avatar, can be seriously impactful for the victim. Correspondingly, there is ongoing debate about the status of crimes in the virtual world and whether they are equivalent to crimes in the real world. For instance, concerns about the sexual assault and rape of avatars raise questions about virtual crimes and their impact on users' emotional wellbeing. Issues like violence, murder, or unwanted disappearance of avatars, as well as child crime in XR, demand ethical scrutiny regarding the depiction and consequences of violence in these digital spaces. Furthermore, the involvement of non-human agents, including AI, in violent or criminal acts complicates the attribution of responsibility in virtual environments. If someone engages in harmful or aggressive behaviour towards another in a virtual environment, do you think they should they incur the same consequences as they would in the real world? The continuum of immersive experience perceived by human users highlights the impossibility of drawing rigorous or fixed boundaries between the material and the virtual environments at which ethical questions of XR would no longer apply. XR technologies can provide highly immersive experiences, blurring the lines between the virtual and physical worlds. As a result, violent content in XR has the potential to be more emotionally impactful and realistic than traditional media forms, potentially desensitising users to violence or causing psychological distress. Do you think that violent content in XR is likely to increase, decrease or have no effect upon the tendency for violent behaviours in the real world? There is ongoing debate regarding the impact of violent XR content on user behaviour. Some studies suggest that exposure to violent virtual environments may lead to increased aggression or desensitisation to violence, while others argue that the effects may vary depending on individual factors and context. Addressing crime in the context of XR requires collaboration between XR developers, platform operators, law enforcement agencies, policymakers, and users. Strategies for addressing XR-related crime may include implementing robust security measures, enforcing community guidelines and codes of conduct, providing user education and awareness programs, and establishing legal frameworks to address virtual crimes that have real-world impacts.
XR manipulation refers to the intentional alteration or distortion of reality within virtual environments. XR manipulation can alter users' perception of reality, create illusions or deceptions that trick users into perceiving virtual content as part of their physical environment. It can also be used to control the narrative within immersive experiences to shape their understanding, interpretation, and beliefs. The emergence of virtual beings, (for instance, avatars representing deceased individuals) introduces complex ethical questions regarding identity and agency. Immersive technologies can also incorporate nudging techniques that are used to guide users' actions, shape their experiences, or promote certain outcomes. In the context of VR, ‘nudging’ refers to the application of certain measures to subtly influence the user’s decision-making. For instance, it may involve prompts, reminders, or visual cues; the presentation of options in specific ways; portraying particular behaviours as the social norm; or the offering of rewards or incentives. Given the intention to influence, the use of nudging techniques has ethical implications related to user autonomy and informed consent, so needs to be considered carefully. While these facets can enhance immersion and entertainment value, they can also invoke ethical concerns related to transparency, consent, and user agency. XR manipulation can be exploited for malicious purposes, such as spreading misinformation, creating deceptive experiences, or manipulating users' behaviour for financial or political gain. Safeguards need to be implemented to prevent misuse of XR technologies and protect users from harmful manipulation.
Miltos Ladikas shares his thoughts on manipulation in XR. People are susceptible to manipulation particularly with extended reality more than any other technology, I believe. Because extended reality intrudes into people's mind like no other technology that we know of. The reason is that extended reality creates, basically, reality. That's why it's called extended reality. And this reality, which is not exactly real, it might be augmented, might be totally virtual, but in any case, it's something that our brain, our mind, our cognitive functions, accept as real. And once you get to that point, then the possibilities for manipulation are manifold, actually. And we know that from research that psychologists have done by using extended reality, especially these [https://c/Users/hpartington/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/INetCache/Content.Outlook/83I5BQ72/cave CAVE] systems, as they call them, whereby you are in an extended reality environment, totally immersed in this environment. And so they use that to achieve, and they have achieved, better results in psychotherapy as a matter of fact. For example, acrophobia, height phobia, vertigo, for instance. And although this is, of course, a good aspect of, a good use, let's say, of extended reality, it shows how far it can go into manipulating our minds and even our belief systems, and how this manipulation can be really long term. So, yes, there is a real risk of manipulation by using extended reality. We should be aware of that. As I said before, of course, manipulation can have good aspects. Like, you know, we need to manipulate in psychology, instance, we do need to manipulate, the mind in order to create a better functioning. If you like, in a very blunt way, better functioning, cognitively, at least the mind. But one can imagine a lot of cases where this kind of manipulation, especially in younger people, and don't forget that extended reality is more accepted and more used by the younger generation for a very simple reason. They are more immersed into new technologies, in any case. They accept these new technologies, they have them in their lives, every day, from social media to, well any kind, basically, of new technologies that are out there. It's part of growing up, I suppose, nowadays. But that also means that young minds, which are yet not well-formed, if you like, socially at least, and even individually in many respects, they can really be manipulated through extended reality for, well, any kind of purpose imaginable by the ones that use basically and develop and distribute extended reality.
'''Video Transcript''' When we talk about virtual reality and extended reality, of course there are a lot of typical ethical questions that we always ask with regard to other types of technologies, questions about data, questions about cybersecurity, questions about control, and so on. I would say maybe one of the most important themes of ethical questioning, not just one question but a whole host of questions, are questions about manipulation. Why is that? Because when we wear a virtual reality device, it can interact with our brains in ways that are beyond our conscious control. We call it subliminal interactions. They're not always present to our consciousness. Sometimes these devices use brain data, even if they don't, even if they just present a picture in front of our eyes. Still, the way they do it, is not very natural. They do create illusions. They can probably, incite us or manipulate us into doing something. There is a word to nudge, nudge us into doing something. This can be a good thing. So, maybe they can inform us that we should eat more fruit and vegetables and enjoy the good weather, even if it's raining outside, but we will have an illusion of being happy. This will probably nudge us to some beneficial or nice behaviour. They can also manipulate us into doing things that are not necessarily in our interest. So, there is good and bad there. It's not always bad manipulation. It can be also beneficial or good nudging. But the very existence of this technology begs the question, who decides? Because this is below our conscious control. Even if you tell the human, ‘Well, this device will probably influence you in some ways. Can you please consent to this?’ Because we want to use the device, we will probably sign the informed consent form and still be manipulated. Even if you tell the user, ‘You know, there is a possibility of manipulation,’ they will probably not really notice it because that's in the nature of how these devices interact with our brains, below the threshold of consciousness. So, manipulation is a very difficult, rich and really broad family of ethical questions to think about when we think about virtual and extended reality.
'''Video Transcript''' Access to metaverses requires resources that are not available to most people, including a steady electrical supply, high speed internet connection, a headset and / or haptic devices, for an immersive experience, as well as a powerful computer. Over time, the costs of XR devices and hardware may come down, but it is hard to imagine a time when they will be accessible to all. Aside from the costs, there are inclusivity issues related to use by people with disabilities. For instance, the design of VR headsets can inadvertently exclude individuals with specific disabilities, limiting their participation in metaverses. Current commercially available XR technology may only be comfortable to wear for about 50–60% of the population. How can virtual environments and the technical means of navigating them be adapted to the needs of visually or hearing-impaired persons? Addressing the needs of individuals with disabilities is crucial for creating an accessible and welcoming metaverse, but industries might perceive the market of people with disabilities as less lucrative, potentially leading to a lack of tailored offerings. The use of immersive technologies within the workplace is also a grey area. There has been increased use of immersive technologies in workspaces, and attention needs to be placed on the impact, either positive or negative, on these spaces. If the technology is not inclusive of all workers, then this raises ethical concerns.
'''Video Transcript''' If we think about fairness and equity, I would say, then we take a little bit of a different perspective also on extended reality, because manipulation is one aspect, but let's not forget that extended reality is still a three-dimensional technology. And not everyone can use three-dimensional technology for a simple reason. That we have a certain percentage of the population, it's not very high, but still it's significant. I believe it's around 4% or 5% that they do not have a depth vision, let's say. So, for these people, the use of extended reality is impossible basically. But then we have a big number of people, we don't have a lot of research yet to know exact numbers, that they simply find extended reality too confusing, too nauseatic. They cannot function well. So, all these people, whatever the percentage is, but it's definitely a significant minority, are not able to benefit from extended reality. Even more so they are averse to it. So that means that we have a percentage of the population that cannot use extended reality and will be left behind so far as extended reality is used widely for many reasons. For example, for training, for education, and so on and so forth.
Expert Interview with Miltos Ladikas - Fairness and Inclusivity
Do you know what impacts the use of XR has on the environment? Make a note of as many advantages and disadvantages as you can think of, and then watch the video to check your lists. The potential environmental impacts associated with the use of XR technologies are significant, in both positive and negative ways. Potential positive impacts include the reduction of travel, through remote collaboration, training, and meetings, a reduction of material consumption and waste through virtual prototyping and design, and the use of immersive experiences to raise awareness about environmental issues and sustainable practices. However, the processing power required for high-fidelity VR and AR experiences, can be significant and there are concerns about the energy consumption in public places and cloud gaming server farms. Cloud-based XR applications rely on data centres for processing and storage, which consume substantial amounts of energy. Increasing demand for XR content and services may lead to the expansion of data centre infrastructure, exacerbating environmental concerns if not powered by renewable energy sources. The manufacturing of XR devices requires materials such as plastics, metals, and rare earth elements, which can have environmental impacts associated with extraction, processing, and disposal. The production of XR components and materials may also have indirect environmental impacts, such as habitat destruction, pollution, and resource depletion associated with mining and manufacturing processes. Finally, the disposal of XR hardware contributes to electronic waste. As XR devices evolve rapidly, older models may become obsolete, leading to disposal challenges and environmental pollution if not properly managed. Addressing the environmental impacts of XR requires a holistic approach, including efforts to improve energy efficiency, reduce electronic waste, promote sustainable manufacturing practices, and invest in renewable energy infrastructure. Additionally, raising awareness about the environmental implications of XR technologies and fostering responsible consumption and disposal habits among users can contribute to minimizing their overall environmental footprint.
Many of the ethics issues related to XR are not unique. For instance, matters related to data protection, privacy, and confidentiality in XR, appear to be similar to other technologies like biobanking or the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare. However, some aspects may require specialist consideration. For instance, for the involvement of children, for consideration of perceptions of reality, work training and cybercrime. An ethics-by-design approach is advocated by many, whereby ethical considerations are integrated into the design and development process of products, services, technologies, or systems from the outset. The goal is to proactively identify, address, and mitigate ethical risks and concerns throughout the entire lifecycle of a product or service, rather than addressing them as an afterthought or in response to ethical dilemmas that arise later. However, an ethics by design approach can be difficult to reconcile with standard procedures for ethics approval that generally require a detailed description of how ethics issues will be addressed before the onset of a project. There are currently no specific EU or international guidelines governing XR. Listed in the Further Resources section of this module are the current most relevant sources of ethics guidance as well as the most relevant related regulations.
'''Video Transcript''' When researchers work on VR applications or VR headsets, devices or techniques, they should always think about the effects that these devices will have on the user. This is not very new. We typically think about how this or that kind of software will be used. Here, the devices and techniques may have an effect that goes quite far. First, because there is subliminal influence, because these devices don't necessarily present things to the consciousness of the user but can go beyond. Second because these devices and techniques will be used in sectors of human life, which very often influence humans profoundly deeply. Let me take a couple of examples. One is education. Another one is healthcare. When you use a VR device for education, of course you should ask, well, what kind of human are we creating that way? What knowledge, what skills are we creating that way? If we teach a human to swim using a virtual reality device, will that human be able to swim in the real life? If we teach a professional, let's say first aid professional, to deliver first aid through some simulation in extended reality, maybe for the fireman or for medical, healthcare professionals, will they be able to do this in real life? If we use a VR device to study how to fix nuclear explosions, and if, God forbid, there is a nuclear explosion, will we be able to use our virtual skills in the material world? These deep questions are not just pure abstract things, let's figure out later. The researchers should think about these things and try to develop solutions by design. This is what we call, there is an expression favoured by the European Commission, ‘[https://ec.europa.eu/info/funding-tenders/opportunities/docs/2021-2027/horizon/guidance/ethics-by-design-and-ethics-of-use-approaches-for-artificial-intelligence_he_en.pdf ethics by design]’. Well, ethics by design doesn't mean that your device will be ethical by design, of course not, but it means that as you're designing a headset or techniques and applications, you're thinking about possible ethical issues that may arise during use, later on when your device or technique will be deployed in the real world, and you're trying to put some checks and balances by design at an early stage. So, depending on the sector where your technique or device will be used, depending on the kind of software, is there machine learning or not? Is it subliminal or not? Depending on the type of the headset or the hardware, does it use a brain computer interface or not? Is it just a screen or maybe much more than just a screen? So, depending on all these things, there should be questions asked by the designers at early stages, and at least some, I would say, solutions or maybe some first ideas of solutions that are developed in the code, in the design of the hardware at an early stage, so that when ethical questions arise later, there will be more traceability, more checks, more metrics more evaluation in order for us to be able later to deal with these kinds of questions, both at the individual level and at the societal level.
Expert Interview with Alexei Grinbaum - XR and Ethics Compliance
You can try these questions to see whether your learning from this module addresses the intended learning outcomes. No one else will see your answers. No personal data is collected. What types of personal data can XR platforms and applications potentially collect from users?
Thank you for taking this irecs module! Your feedback is very valuable to us and will help us to improve future training materials. We would like to ask for your opinions: 1. To improve the irecs e-learning modules 2. For research purposes to evaluate the outcomes of the irecs project To this end we have developed a short questionnaire, which will take from 5 to 10 minutes to answer. Your anonymity is guaranteed; you won’t be asked to share identifying information or any sensitive information. Data will be handled and stored securely and will only be used for the purposes detailed above. You can find the questionnaire by clicking on the link below. This link will take you to a new page; [https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforms.office.com%2Fe%2F3puN6rfFYS&data=05%7C02%7CKChatfield%40uclan.ac.uk%7Cde983f54bcc64d66a02908dcd0b50ccd%7Cebf69982036b4cc4b2027aeb194c5065%7C0%7C0%7C638614723283142461%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=noGJNHMbkeQtmNkEzmf2zx2ua3sxX%2F7ta9F8pmckrSQ%3D&reserved=0 https://forms.office.com/e/3puN6rfFYS] Thank you!
'''Ethics guidance and regulations''' A not-for-profit organisation, The '''Metaverse Standards Forum''' brings together most of the industrial players involved in the metaverse, with the aim of creating the conditions for its worldwide interoperability:https://metaverse-standards.org/ '''AI Act: the EU AI Act of April 2021''' included in its annex the following statement: Annex III, article 1: “Biometric identification and categorization of natural persons: (a) AI systems intended to be used for the ‘real-time’ and ‘post’ remote biometric identification of natural persons;” This statement applies in part to XR, to the collection of biometric data during the user's real-time 3D experience. The January 2024 version of the same AI Act further emphasises risks related to biometric categorisation and emotion recognition, and is also relevant for XR. https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/ '''Council of the European Union,''' Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence (Artificial Intelligence Act) and amending certain Union legislative acts, paragraph 16, 2022: “AI systems deploy subliminal components such as audio, image, video stimuli that persons cannot perceive as those stimuli are beyond human perception or other subliminal techniques that subvert or impair person’s autonomy, decision-making or free choices in ways that people are not consciously aware of, or even if aware not able to control or resist, for example in cases of machine-brain interfaces or virtual reality.” Basdevant, A, François, C, Ronfard, R. (2022) Mission exploratoire sur les métavers. Rapport interministériel. France. Available at: [https://www.economie.gouv.fr/files/files/2022/Rapport-interministeriel-metavers.pdf https://www.economie.gouv.fr/files/files/2022/Rapport-interministeriel-] [https://www.economie.gouv.fr/files/files/2022/Rapport-interministeriel-metavers.pdf metavers.pdf] IEEE SA - The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Extended Reality: https://standards.ieee.org/industry-connections/ethics-extended-reality/ INRIA’s Website: https://www.inria.fr/en/how-does-virtual-reality-works Techethos website (page on Digital XR): https://www.techethos.eu/digital-extended-reality/ The Open AR Cloud Code of Conduct: https://www.openarcloud.org/documents/code-of-conduct XR Safety Initiative (XRSI) ethical guidelines for developers, users, and organizations: https://xrsi.org/xrsi-code-of-conduct Zhu, L (2022) The Metaverse: Concepts and Issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service. Available at: https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R47224.pdf. '''Videos''' Kent Bye’s XR Ethics Manifesto: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CXgY3YXxqJ8 Masterclass on XR in the classroom (Central Queensland University, Australia): [https://www.studyaustralia.gov.au/english/masterclasses/extended-reality-xr-in-the-classroom https://www.studyaustralia.gov.au/english/masterclasses/extended-] [https://www.studyaustralia.gov.au/english/masterclasses/extended-reality-xr-in-the-classroom reality-xr-in-the-classroom] '''Bibliography''' Adomaitis, L., Grinbaum, A., Lenzi, D. (2022) Identification and Specification of Potential Ethical Issues and Impacts and Analysis of Ethical Issues. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7619852. Aucouturier E, Grinbaum A (2023) Recommendations to address ethical challenges from research in new technologies. CEA - Commissariat à l’énergie atomique et aux énergies alternatives. Available at: https://cea.hal.science/cea-04293426 Behr, K. M., Nosper, A., Klimmt, C., & Hartmann, T. (2005). Some practical considerations of ethical issues in VR research. Presence, 14(6), 668-676. Fox, D., & Thornton, I. G. (2022). White Paper-The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Extended Reality (XR) Report--Extended Reality (XR) Ethics and Diversity, Inclusion, and Accessibility. The IEEE Global Initiative on Ethics of Extended Reality (XR) Report--Extended Reality (XR) Ethics and Diversity, Inclusion, and Accessibility, 1-25. Grinbaum, A., & Adomaitis, L. (2022). Moral equivalence in the metaverse. NanoEthics, 16(3), 257-270. Kröger, J. L., Lutz, O. H. M., & Müller, F. (2020). What does your gaze reveal about you? On the privacy implications of eye tracking. In IFIP International Summer School on Privacy and Identity Management (pp. 226-241). Springer, Cham.