Privacy in Immersive Extended Reality: Exploring User Perceptions, Concerns, and Coping Strategies

TL;DR

Privacy in Immersive Extended Reality investigates how XR users perceive data collection and privacy threats. The authors employ a scenario-based survey with 464 participants across 18 XR data-collection scenarios to map awareness, concerns, and coping strategies. They find that awareness of granular XR sensors is limited, and discomfort depends on data type, perceived sensitivity, device status, and perceived likelihood of data use; many users adopt minimal coping strategies or express privacy resignation. The work emphasizes the need for XR-specific privacy interfaces, transparent data practices, and privacy-by-default designs to empower users without sacrificing immersion.

Abstract

Extended Reality (XR) technology is changing online interactions, but its granular data collection sensors may be more invasive to user privacy than web, mobile, and the Internet of Things technologies. Despite an increased interest in studying developers' concerns about XR device privacy, user perceptions have rarely been addressed. We surveyed 464 XR users to assess their awareness, concerns, and coping strategies around XR data in 18 scenarios. Our findings demonstrate that many factors, such as data types and sensitivity, affect users' perceptions of privacy in XR. However, users' limited awareness of XR sensors' granular data collection capabilities, such as involuntary body signals of emotional responses, restricted the range of privacy-protective strategies they used. Our results highlight a need to enhance users' awareness of data privacy threats in XR, design privacy-choice interfaces tailored to XR environments, and develop transparent XR data practices.

Figures (4)

• Figure 1: Survey flow: Upon passing the screening questionnaire, 464 participants were asked about their understanding of XR and awareness of data collection. Next, they were presented with four randomly selected scenarios from a total of 18 scenarios from \ref{['tab:Scenarios']}, resulting in approximately 103 responses per scenario. For each scenario, participants answered questions relating to comfort with data collection, perceived data sensitivity, and how realistic they perceived the scenario to be. Finally, the participants shared their experience with XR devices and demographic information.
• Figure 2: Percentage of participants' ($N=464$) perceived data collection of various data types through XR devices.
• Figure 3: Percentage of participants' ($n=464$) comfort level, perceived data sensitivity and perceived realism of a scenario between the data type and the device status. Cells with a higher percentage have a darker background colour. For instance, 29% of participants selected very uncomfortable when their cognitive, emotional, and personality estimates were being observed by the device.
• Figure 4: n= number of participants who responded to this question. Summary of participants' responses to the conditional open-ended question "What would you do (if any) to mitigate the discomfort raised?" (Q5) for each Scenario. The question was only shown to participants who selected 1-very uncomfortable or 2-uncomfortable regarding data collection (Q3) in each Scenario. Total percentage $>100\%$ since a participant might mention multiple coping strategies.