Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the Quality of Working Life: a scoping review

Abstract

In recent years, immersive environments and the technologies employed within them, such as Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR), have become increasingly significant, particularly in the domains of education, work, and entertainment. Moreover, the concept of persistent, immersive virtual worlds – commonly referred to as Metaverses – has gained attention due to advancements and opportunities in VR and AR. These immersive environments are transforming how we work, especially in communication, coordination, and collaboration. Hence, an important question that arises is how these environments influence Quality of Working Life (QWL). This study provides an overview of the effects of immersive environments on QWL. We conducted a scoping review following the framework by Arksey and O’Malley in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The findings identify three major QWL topics influenced by immersive environments: (i) Mental Health, highlighting stress reduction and well-being enhancement; (ii) Safety & Prevention, emphasizing accident prevention and risk mitigation; and (iii) Workplace Design, focusing on improved ergonomics. We derive practical implications for QWL and provide theoretical implications to scoping reviews. While our study considered the short-term effects of such technologies as limitations, future studies should address the long-term effects of immersive environments on QWL.

Full text

i-com 2024; aop
Thomas Paetow*, Johannes Wichmann, Michael Leyer and Marianne Schmolke
Towards future of work in immersive
environments and its impact on the Quality
of Working Life: a scoping review
https://doi.org/10.1515/icom-2024-0019
Received February 20, 2024; accepted December 20, 2024;
published online January 15, 2025
Abstract:In recent years, immersive environments and the
technologies employed within them, such as Augmented
Reality (AR), Virtual Reality (VR), and Mixed Reality (MR),
have become increasingly significant, particularly in the
domains of education, work, and entertainment. Moreover,
the concept of persistent, immersive virtual worlds – com-
monly referred to as Metaverses – has gained attention due
to advancements and opportunities in VR and AR. These
immersive environments are transforming how we work,
especially in communication, coordination, and collabora-
tion. Hence, an important question that arises is how these
environments influence Quality of Working Life (QWL). This
study provides an overview of the eects of immersive envi-
ronments on QWL. We conducted a scoping review follow-
ing the framework by Arksey and O’Malley in accordance
with the PRISMA guidelines. The findings identify three
major QWL topics influenced by immersive environments:
(i) Mental Health, highlighting stress reduction and well-
being enhancement; (ii) Safety & Prevention, emphasizing
accident prevention and risk mitigation; and (iii) Workplace
*Corresponding author: Thomas Paetow, Wismar Business School, Wis-
mar University of Applied Sciences, Technology, Business and Design,
Philipp-Müller-Str. 14, D-23966 Wismar, MV, Germany,
E-mail: thomas.paetow@hs-wismar.de.https://orcid.org/0000-0001-
9503-282X
Johannes Wichmann, Chair of Digitisation & Process Management, Uni-
versity of Marburg, Marburg, Germany; and Chair of Digitisation & Process
Management, University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany,
E-mail: johannes.wichmann@wiwi.uni-marburg.de.https://orcid.org/
0000-0002-9877-1422
Michael Leyer, Chair of Digitisation & Process Management, University
of Marburg, Barfuessertor 2, D-35037 Marburg, HE, Germany; and School
of Management, Queensland University of Technology, 2 George St, 4000
Brisbane, QLD, Australia,
E-mail: michael.leyer@wiwi.uni-marburg.de.https://orcid.org/0000-
0001-9429-7770
Marianne Schmolke, Wismar Business School, Wismar University of
Applied Sciences, Technology, Business and Design, Philipp-Müller-Str. 14,
D-23966 Wismar, MV, Germany,
E-mail: marianne.schmolke@hs-wismar.de.https://orcid.org/0000-0002-
4293-603X
Design, focusing on improved ergonomics. We derive prac-
tical implications for QWL and provide theoretical implica-
tions to scoping reviews. While our study considered the
short-term eects of such technologies as limitations, future
studies should address the long-term eects of immersive
environments on QWL.
Keywords: immersive environments; quality of working
life; QWL; future of work; scoping review; PRISMA frame-
work
1 Introduction
Immersive environments have become increasingly impor-
tant in recent years, primarily due to the growing aord-
ability of Augmented Reality (AR), Mixed Reality (MR), and
Virtual Reality (VR) devices for households.1,2 These tech-
nologies are widely used in education and training3–5,shop-
ping6,7 and gaming.8In addition to individual immersive
applications, the concept of immersive virtual worlds is also
important for collaboration, specifically driven by advances
in VR and AR technologies.1,9–11 These immersive virtual
worlds (VW), often referred to as Metaverses, focus on pro-
viding an immersive, three-dimensional, persistent artifi-
cial environment in which users can interact through vir-
tual characters (e.g., avatars) or real individuals.2,12–14
Next to being a hobby, immersive environments with
applied technologies such as AR, VR, and MR are becoming
increasingly important for work and collaboration in persis-
tent, immersive virtual worlds. They are important as they
open up new possibilities for interaction, dierent forms
of embedding information, and spatial connections.8For
instance, VR allows users to visualize complex workflows in
3D spaces, which enhances understanding and productivity,
particularly in fields like engineering.15 AR, on the other
hand, supports on-site collaboration by overlaying instruc-
tions directly into the user’s field of view, as demonstrated
in maintenance and training contexts.16,17 While the tech-
nical, conceptual, and performance aspects are promising,
the users of these working environments should also be
considered. For this, Quality of Working Life (QWL) is the
main concept for analysis (e.g., Nanjundeswaraswamy &
Open Access. ©2025 the author(s), published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2—T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
Swamy18, Walton19). QWL refers to aspects such as physical
well-being, material well-being, social well-being, and emo-
tional well-being, as well as the development and activity
of employees in their working context.20 These dimensions
are usually also reflected in job satisfaction as a closely
related concept of perceived QWL.21,22 QWL/job satisfaction
are important considerations for work environments as
employees choose their employers not only based on salary
but also on these aspects [e.g., Sirgy et al.23]. They are rather
motivated to perform well and are more likely to stay in the
job. Moreover, it is necessary to increase acceptance along
with aspects of worker health and rights protection that are
of interest not only to individuals but also to society (e.g.,
Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy18, Leitão et al.24).
Despite their potential, immersive environments are
not yet widely used as working environments due to,
e.g., high implementation costs, technical challenges, and
usability concerns.25,26 For example, issues such as cyber-
sickness, motion fatigue, and the need for user training
hinder broader adoption.25– 27 Additionally, the integration
of immersive environments into organizational workflows
often requires substantial changes in existing infrastructure
and processes, which can be a barrier for many compa-
nies.12 At the same time, the eectiveness of immersive
environments in improving QWL depends significantly on
how collaboration processes and workflows are designed
and deployed. Poorly structured processes may undermine
potential benefits, such as stress reduction or enhanced
teamwork.28,29
Since immersive environments lead to changes and are
not yet widely used as working environments, it is cru-
cial to understand the potential implications on employees’
QWL and to direct the future of work. These technologies
provide transformative opportunities for communication,
coordination, and collaboration, particularly in remote or
distributed teams.9,30 They extend traditional tools such as
video conferencing by enabling deeper engagement in vir-
tual environments, facilitating training, simulations, and 3D
collaboration that can replace physical presence in creative
and industrial work settings, such as emergency training.3
The extent to which these environments impact QWL, how-
ever, depends on their configuration and the collaborative
mechanisms employed. Well-designed collaborative work-
flows are essential for leveraging the benefits of immersive
technologies to improve QWL.31,32
Thus, we pose the following research questions: (a)
Which topics have been addressed when considering QWL
in immersive environments, and (b) which immersive tech-
nologies have been considered in particular? To answer
those, we apply scoping review guidelines as method for our
study. To the best of our knowledge, there are no reviews
that consider QWL in immersive environments, which is
why we aim to close this gap. To structure our results, we
use the PRISMA method,33 which provides a rigorous frame-
work for scoping reviews. Scoping reviews are important
for immersive environment research across various areas.
For instance, scoping reviews have been conducted on the
impact of the virtual worlds on health,34 challenges, privacy,
and security issues related to digital environments,35 as well
as in the field of emergency medicine.36
Furthermore, scoping reviews were conducted to
examine the impact of AR, VR, and MR on performance and
subjective experience in assembly tasks,37 and on the eects
of VR and AR on consumers in shopping environments.6
These studies demonstrate the widespread use of the scop-
ing review method in immersive environment research and
its contribution to important insights into various aspects of
immersive virtual environments. Our review contributes to
a better understanding of the consequences of immersive
environments for QWL.
The article is structured as follows: First, we provide
an overview of the related concepts in the theoretical back-
ground. This is followed by the method section, in which we
describe the parameters of the conducted scoping review.
Section 4 presents the results, which are then discussed in
Section 5, where we derive a research agenda and pose
future research directions. Ultimately, we provide conclu-
sions, limitations of our study, and theoretical and practical
implications.
2 Theoretical background
2.1 Immersive environments
Immersive environments are digital, virtual simulations/
applications or virtual worlds in which users fully immerse
themselves in a computer-generated reality or integrate
digital, non-physical elements into their physical surround-
ings.38– 41 Sensory experiences can be created through
visual, auditory, and/or haptic stimuli, which convey a sense
of physical presence in the simulated world.39,42 Immersive
environments are enabled by various technologies such as
VR, AR, and MR – collectively referred to as Extended Real-
ity (XR).41,43,44 Each technology oers a dierent approach
to immersion and also diers in terms of use cases.5,16,45– 47
The lowest level of immersion is AR.48 AR enhances
physical reality by overlaying digital information or objects,
such as images, texts, and 3D models, on the physical envi-
ronment in real-time without fully replacing it.16,48,49 AR
utilizes cameras, sensors, and processors to analyze the
physical surroundings and superimpose virtual objects in
real-time.41,47 For instance, AR applications have proven

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —3
particularly eective in reducing cognitive load during com-
plex tasks, enhancing both performance and user satisfac-
tion.17 In the workplace, AR is used in maintenance and
repair, such as assisting technicians with troubleshooting
machinery through visual instructions.5,17 Another example
is the use of AR for neurosurgical training, where dicult
surgical scenarios can be practiced using various AR appli-
cations.5
Considering the level of immersion, MR is level two,
between AR and VR.48 MR seamlessly blends the real world
with virtual elements, allowing users to interact with both
worlds simultaneously, supported by advanced mapping
and sensors.40,48 MR allows virtual objects to be embed-
ded in the real world while being physically manipula-
ble.48 An example is the use of Microsoft HoloLens 2 in
medicine, where MR enables real-time data integration
with visual aids during live surgeries, enhancing decision-
making and increasing precision.3,50 In industrial settings,
MR systems have also demonstrated utility in enabling
ergonomic workspace designs, reducing physical strain for
workers.51
VR oers level-three immersion by completely replac-
ing the real world with computer-generated environments
and requires specialized hardware, such as head-mounted
displays (HMDs), like the Oculus Rift.3,52 Common work-
place applications include training for complex industrial
tasks, such as practicing assembly steps or repairs in vir-
tual environments without the need for expensive physical
equipment.5,15 Moreover, VR facilitates collaboration in dis-
tributed teams by enabling immersive environments that
replicate physical meeting dynamics, enhancing team cohe-
sion and productivity.28
While immersive technologies such as AR, MR, and VR
are typically used for short-lived, temporary environments
that can be restarted as needed, there are also more expan-
sive, immersive virtual world platforms, such as the Meta-
verse(s) (e.g., Wang et al.8). Metaverses dier fundamen-
tally from the typical applications of immersive technolo-
gies: They are developed as persistent, immersive virtual
environments that coexist with the physical world, seam-
lessly integrating work, social interaction, and everyday
activities.8Metaverses are large, interoperable networks
of one or more 3D virtual worlds, which can be accessed
synchronously and continuously by an unlimited number
of users across various industries.53 Within these environ-
ments, essential data, such as identities, are preserved and
can be adapted to meet diverse needs.53– 55 Dwivedi et al.2
categorize the Metaverse into group-oriented purposes (e.g.,
virtual oces, remote teamwork) and individual-oriented
purposes (e.g., gaming, entertainment, and virtual busi-
ness). This distinction highlights the Metaverses’ versatility
in serving both collaborative and personal needs.2Recent
studies show that current developments in Metaverses
are fundamental for a socio-economic system that will
be closely intertwined with the global economy.2Hence,
Metaverses have been subject to various studies in recent
times.1,2,54 Notably, metaverse platforms are also being
explored for their potential to enhance cross-cultural collab-
oration by bridging geographical and cultural gaps.56
While XR (AR, MR, and VR), as the primary interface
technologies,2have already reached the required technical
maturity,57 only limited progress has been made due to
technical challenges in communication, coordination, and
interoperability.57,58 This has led to the conclusion that a
functional Metaverse has not yet emerged.55,59 Researchers
emphasize that AR, MR, and VR are not synonymous with
the Metaverse but are rather technologies through which
the Metaverse can be experienced.2,8,13
Furthermore, Schöbel & Tingelho32 highlight that the
successful realization of the potential of Metaverse plat-
forms is depending not only on overcoming technical chal-
lenges but also on addressing societal challenges. These
include fostering trust and acceptance, integrating into
social structures, and eectively communicating the poten-
tial benefits and risks.32 Addressing these societal factors
is particularly crucial for ensuring equitable access to the
Metaverse, especially for underrepresented groups.60 With
the increasing digitization of the workplace and the ongo-
ing evolution of Metaverses, they are expected to be more
common in work environments.30 This could fundamen-
tally change how people work, creating new forms of work
opportunities.
Consequently, QWL could be significantly impacted.
The persistent nature of these virtual worlds sets them apart
from the short-term use cases of other immersive technolo-
gies, highlighting the need to consider Metaverses as a dis-
tinct development in the realm of immersive environments.
In the following, when we refer to Metaverse platforms,
we will understand them as technical tools2and use the
term Virtual Worlds synonymously, as Metaverses represent
the current development stage or virtual worlds.1Finally,
Figure 1 illustrates the dierences between the immersive
technologies AR, MR, VR, and VWs (e.g., Metaverses), sum-
marizing their respective levels of immersion, required
hardware and software, as well as potential work tasks
associated with each technology.
2.2 Future of work in immersive
environments
Technological changes such as AR, MR, VR, its applications
and immersive virtual worlds in general, as well as Artificial

4—T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
Technology
Persistent, immersive 3D
environments; focus on
continuous interaction and
integration with the physical
world 8,13
High-level immersion; fully
replaces the real world with a
computer-generated
environment 3,52
Mid-level immersion; blends
real and virtual worlds with
interactive virtual objects 40,48
Low-level immersion; enhances
physical reality by overlaying
digital elements in real-
time 16,48,49
Immersion
Accessible via AR/MR/VR
devices 2,8
Head-mounted displays (HMDs)
such as Oculus Rift 3,52
Advanced mapping and
sensors; examples include
devices like Microsoft HoloLens
2 3,50
Cameras, sensors, and
processors 41,47
Hardware
Platforms enabling multi-user,
synchronous collaboration (e.g.,
Metaverse environments) 53–55
3D modeling and simulation
software for training and team
collaboration 15,28
Real-time data integration tools
and ergonomic assessment
systems 51
Applications that provide
overlays, such as neurosurgical
training and maintenance
assistance tools 5,17
Software
Remote teamwork, virtual
offices, cross-cultural
collaboration, and activity
integration 2,8,53,55
Industrial training, immersive
collaboration, 3D visualization,
and stress reduction 3,15,28,126
Ergonomic design, decision-
making in surgeries, and
workflow integration 40,48,50,51
Real-time maintenance, high-
precision training, on-site
collaboration, and workflow
optimization 5,16,17,48
Work Tasks
Real
Environments
Virtual
Environment
Mixed
Reality
(MR)
Augmented
Reality
(AR)
Virtual
Reality
(VR)
Virtual Worlds
(VW)
e. g., Metaverses
Extended Reality (XR)
Network of Virtual
Environments
using
Proprietary, non-persistent virtual world
e.g., single applications/simulations
persistent
virtual world networks
Figure 1: Immersive technologies scale.
Intelligence, economic changes like digital business models,
and sociodemographic changes such as the pluralization of
employment requirements bring numerous new demands
for companies regarding the future of work (e.g., Santana &
Cobo61). In particular, digitalization has profoundly changed
the way work is done and the necessary skills employees
need in terms of communication, coordination, and collab-
oration with IT tools, a change accelerated by the global
SARS-CoV-2 pandemic.62,63
Identifying the future work competencies employees
need to adapt to future requirements has received signif-
icant attention in research.64– 66 Research has highlighted
numerous essential soft and hard skills needed for future
work, such as adaptability for dynamic shifts between
projects, high social skills, innovation capability, and will-
ingness to learn. Employees will also need to be mobile, able
to switch between dierent projects quickly, possess social
and communication skills, and be familiar with oce tools
that require quick learning, creativity, IT skills, and team-
work.67,68 The multitude of new demands carries the risk of
quality deficits associated with economic costs.67 Therefore,
companies need to invest in training and retraining their
employees to ensure they have the necessary skills and
qualifications.
Immersive Environments oer a way to develop essen-
tial skills in a targeted manner. VR- and AR-based learn-
ing platforms provide opportunities to acquire practical
skills and enable the development of crucial soft skills such
as communication and teamwork. Holuša et al.4demon-
strate that VR creates an immersive and interactive learning
environment, which is particularly eective in fostering
practical abilities and social competencies. Similarly, Kiss
et al.69 emphasize that VR is valuable in the business context
for training teamwork and communication. Employees can
enhance their skills in realistic, simulated environments.69
Doroudian70 further highlights that immersive environ-
ments improve social presence and coordination, which is
especially important in team-oriented work settings.
On the other hand, immersive environments are
transforming how communication, coordination, and

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —5
collaboration occur in the workplace. Communication ser-
ves as the foundation for other processes, enabling
information exchange and shared understanding through
various channels, e.g., in immersive environments.28,29 In
VR and AR, teams can communicate in immersive envi-
ronments using nonverbal cues like eye contact and ges-
tures, reducing misunderstandings and enhancing inter-
action.29,30,56,71 Coordination builds upon communication
by aligning individual eorts and resources toward
shared objectives.28,72 Immersive environments enhance
coordination through AR and MR functionalities, allowing
remote experts to overlay instructions directly into
the user’s field of view, which facilitates the precise
execution of complex tasks.30,72 Finally, collaboration
integrates communication and coordination into shared
problem-solving and goal achievement.4,9,29 Real-time
project work in immersive environments allows teams to
share and manipulate visual representations in simulated
settings, thereby increasing eciency and fostering shared
understanding.5,30 In immersive settings, tools like AR
and VR enable synchronized interactions, facilitating
better collaborative dynamics and reducing the ambiguity
often present in remote teamwork.30,72 Well-designed
work processes and user-friendly technologies are
crucial for this, as individuals are often not experts in
collaboration.73,74 Providers of immersive solutions must
take responsibility for creating these conditions to foster
meaningful collaboration.32,60
Workplaces are already evolving as companies estab-
lish Metaverse oces for telework and remote work.2,56
Examples of this include platforms developed by Gather,
Teamflow, NVIDIA, and Meta Inc.30,75 According to Šímová
et al., the productivity of virtual teams can be increased
through knowledge, autonomy, creativity, trust, communi-
cation, and physical health.30 It is unclear whether these
factors are applicable in virtual worlds like Metaverses.30
Employees must also have the skills to utilize the technical
aspects of VR, MR, and AR systems.3,4 This includes explicit
proficiency in handling the necessary hardware, such as
HMDs, controllers, and the relevant software.4Additionally,
spatial awareness is essential or must be developed to eec-
tively interact with objects in augmented, mixed, or virtual
reality environments.4,76 Furthermore, trust in the respec-
tive technology is one of the most significant prerequisites
for working in immersive virtual environments/worlds and
new technologies in general.31,77 There is a need to foster
trust in this technology to achieve usage and acceptance.31,77
According to Nevo et al., employees who already use virtual
worlds, such as games, for leisure purposes can recognize
their suitability for the workplace and thus contribute to
dissemination and acceptance within their company.60
Additionally, well-being could be promoted by quickly
entering and leaving virtual worlds, facilitating a switch
between work and leisure.78 Immersive technologies such
as VR and AR are the subject of scientific debate regard-
ing health concerns. “Cybersickness” or “motion sickness”
can occur, which can aect hand-eye coordination,27 lead
to rapid eye fatigue,79 and cause nausea, headaches, and
dizziness.25 While this primarily aects older VR systems,26
current devices are also impacted.25 Future studies should
address these issues to ensure that the use of VR systems
will be smoother in the future. Moreover, in a few years, AR,
MR, and VR will be widely used for employee training and
development, conducting meetings, and organizing events
and conferences.80 Utilizing virtual worlds allows employ-
ees to fulfill their professional obligations from various
geographical locations, overcoming territorial restrictions,
potentially leading to better work-life balance and lower
employee turnover.81,82 This is because virtual worlds like
the Metaverse can create a more pleasant working envi-
ronment and thus help reduce work-related stress.83 Fur-
thermore, if properly designed, virtual worlds can increase
productivity and be free from distractions that can occur in
physical work environments such as the oce.84,85 On the
other hand, it is not only the responsibility of employees
to master immersive technologies but also of providers to
ensure usability through user-centered design, collabora-
tive workflows, and process-supporting technologies. Intu-
itive interfaces and training can further ease adoption and
acceptance.32,60
2.3 Quality of Working Life (QWL)
Taking these eects into account, the term QWL gener-
ally refers to employees’ satisfaction with their work life.
It assesses the quality of the relationship between the
employee and their work environment.24,86 QWL represents
a multi-dimensional concept in human resource manage-
ment, which has been operationalized dierently in vari-
ous periods.87,88 It is also defined as a program to enhance
employee satisfaction to improve the satisfaction, produc-
tivity, and eectiveness of a company.88,89 Richard Wal-
tonintroducedthetermQWLinthe1970s.
19 In his article
“Quality of Working Life: What Is It?” Walton defined eight
dimensions that constitute the QWL: fair compensation,
safe working conditions, opportunities for development, job
security, social integration, participation rights, work-life
balance, and the societal significance of work. These factors
are intended to promote employee well-being and create a
positive, fulfilling work environment.19
Research on QWL began in the 1960s, initially focusing
on dimensions of the desirability of working conditions.24

6—T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
From the 1980s onwards, the need satisfaction approach
and additional dimensions were introduced.24 In today’s
context, these two perspectives are often combined,24 result-
ing in a variety of QWL dimensions, including intrinsic
work motivation, job satisfaction, happiness, job autonomy,
job security, safe working environments, physical health &
safety, job stress & mental health, work-life balance, facil-
ities & aesthetic needs, training & development, as well as
workload, which vary depending on the model, author, year,
and context.18,23,86,90 –95 Thus, it can be concluded that there
is no unified concept to measure QWL holistically.90 Overall,
however, the authors agree that determining QWL always
involves interactions between employees and work contexts
or contents.
Closely related to the concept and dimensions of QWL
and partly integral is job satisfaction, one of the most
studied concepts in work and organizational psychology.96
Yang97 argues that QWL can be seen as a precursor to job
satisfaction. Job satisfaction is often considered a separate
concept, distinct from QWL, as QWL mainly focuses on
employees’ well-being, a point of consensus in the litera-
ture.24,98– 100 Nevertheless, some QWL research integrates
job satisfaction, particularly due to the combination of
the mentioned perspectives (e.g., Nanjundeswaraswamy &
Swamy18 and Warr et al.90). In our study, we treat job satis-
faction as one dimension of QWL. QWL is usually measured
using satisfaction levels.101
While the diversity of QWL dimensions in the litera-
ture reflects its complex and multi-faceted nature, recurring
themes allow for a more structured understanding of the
concept.18,23,95 These themes address fundamental aspects of
employees’ work experiences, such as their psychological
well-being, physical safety, and the design of their work
environment.18,24,95 Walton’s foundational work identified
dimensions like safe working conditions, opportunities for
development, and work-life balance as key components of
QWL.19 Subsequent research has expanded on these ideas,
emphasizing the importance of mental health, risk preven-
tion, and ergonomic workplace design.18,19,23,24,95 Despite the
absence of a universally accepted framework for measur-
ing QWL holistically,90 the literature consistently highlights
three overarching dimensions that capture the key aspects
of QWL: (i) Mental Health, (ii) Safety & Prevention, and (iii)
Workplace Design.
Mental Health refers to employees’ psychological well-
being, stress levels, and ability to maintain a work-life bal-
ance.19,95,102 This dimension is closely tied to intrinsic factors
such as autonomy and self-worth, which Walton19 empha-
sized early on and is further supported by contemporary
perspectives that stress the balance between work demands
and mental resources.23,95,102
Safety & Prevention involve ensuring physical and psy-
chological safety at the workplace to minimize risks and
hazards.18,24,95 Researchers such as Nanjundeswaraswamy
&Swamy
18 and Ellis & Pompili95 emphasize that acci-
dent prevention, ergonomic measures, and safeguarding
employees’ physical health are essential for QWL.
Workplace Design pertains to the physical layout and
structure of the work environment.18,19,23 Walton19 and Sirgy
et al.23 highlight that a well-designed work environment
not only reduces stress and workload but also enhances
productivity and creates a more pleasant atmosphere for
employees.18,19,23
These overarching dimensions provide a structured
lens for analyzing QWL, capturing the interplay between
mental well-being, physical safety, and the design of the
work environment.18,23,95 By consolidating these recurring
themes from the literature, we establish a robust foun-
dation for understanding how QWL is influenced across
diverse work contexts.18,24,90 This perspective allows for a
more systematic exploration of QWL, particularly in evolv-
ing settings such as those shaped by immersive technolo-
gies.18,19,23,95
In summary, QWL can be identified as a crucial factor
in attracting and retaining qualified employees,24,103 which
can lead to a competitive advantage in the context of the
Future of Work, especially in the War for Talents104 and
the diversified demands of dierent generations (e.g., Baby
Boomers, Generation Y, etc.).89
3 Methods
To answer our research questions, we utilized the scoping
review method by Arksey and O’Malley.105 This method aims
to map the relevant literature in the field of interest, provid-
ing a search strategy, a standardized data extraction form,
and a risk of bias assessment.105 Our study also used the
widely recognized Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic
Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework33 to guide
literature reviews. The PRISMA framework provides a sys-
tematic approach for conducting literature reviews and is
widely used in academic research to ensure transparency
and rigor in the review process.33,106
3.1 Literature search
The electronic databases used for the literature search are:
(i) Scopus, (ii) IEEE, (iii) AISEL, and (iv) PubMed. The liter-
ature search was limited to works written in English. All
articles were accessed from July to September 2024, with the
last search run in September 2024 to update the results.

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —7
Table 1: Keyword selection.
Area Keywords used
Immersive environment/virtual worlds “Immersive environment∗” OR “immersive world∗” OR “virtual world” OR “metaverse∗”OR
“cyberspace∗” OR “omniverse∗” OR “superverse∗” OR “hyperverse∗” OR “artificial reality” OR “network of
virtual world∗” OR “virtual environment∗” OR “simulated reality” OR “holographic reality” OR
“multiverse∗” OR “cybercosm∗” OR “augmented reality” OR “virtual reality” OR “mixed reality” OR
“extended reality” OR “AR” OR “VR” OR “MR” OR “XR” OR “mirror world∗” OR “simulated environment∗”
Work “Workplace” OR “office” OR “work” OR “employment” OR “collaboration” OR “communication” OR
“coordination”
Quality of Working Life (components) “Work∗life integration” OR “work∗life balance” OR “quality of work∗life” OR “QWL” OR “quality of
working∗life” OR “job satisfaction” OR “well-being” OR “work∗life quality”
The search string used three AND conditions, covering
the areas of immersive environments, work, and QWL (com-
ponents). The keyword selection and search string for our
inquiry are presented in Table 1.
3.2 Selection of studies
This scoping review examines the impact of working in
immersive environments on QWL. During the study period,
we gathered a total of 1,210 records from various sources:
Scopus (n=821), IEEE (n=244), AISeL (n=8), and PubMed
(n=137). Additionally, we identified two records through a
manual search, which were included in our analysis. Dupli-
cates (n=197) were removed manually. The study selection
flowchart is presented in Figure 2.
3.3 Inclusion and exclusion of studies
The remaining records (n=1,015) were classified as
“relevant” and “non-relevant” for our research. To do so,
three inclusion and one exclusion criteria were applied
when reviewing the title and abstract, which are shown in
Table 2.
The inclusion criteria were defined as follows: (1) Work
in immersive environments refers to work activities sup-
ported by AR, MR, VR, or VW, such as VR-based training or
AR-assisted maintenance processes.3,4 Working conditions
(2) relate to the dimensions of QWL, as outlined in Chapter
2.3. These include physical, psychological, and organiza-
tional factors such as stress reduction, safety, and work-life
balance, grounded in established QWL literature from Wal-
ton19 and Nanjundeswaraswamy & Swamy.18 Additionally,
Records identified through database
searching (n = 1210):
Scopus (n = 821), IEEE (n = 244),
AISeL (n = 8), PubMed (n = 137).
Limits: Written in English
IdentificationScreeningIncluded
Additional records identified through
other sources (n = 2)
Records screened on title and abstract
(n = 1015)
Records excluded based inclusion and
exclusion criteria
(n = 955)
Records assessed for eligibility
(n = 60)
Reports excluded for reasons (n = 28):
Immersive environments not a focus of
research (n = 13)
Employees are not focus (n = 1)
QWL are not a focus of research (n= 8)
Focus only on research idea / abstract (n = 2)
Focus on technology aspects / processes (n = 1)
Written in another language (n = 1)
Not accessible (n = 2)
Studies included in review
(n = 32)
Total records identified
(n = 1212)
Records removed before screening
Duplicate records removed (n = 197)
Figure 2: PRISMA-ScR flow diagram.

8—T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
Table 2: Inclusion and exclusion criteria.
No. Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria
1 The study investigates work in an immersive environment. The study represents a document, such as a book, glossary, or
conference review, in which the keywords were randomly
discovered, but no studies were included that addressed all
the keywords.
2 The study investigates working conditions, i.e., the QWL.
3 The focus of the study is on the level of employees.
the study had to examine the (3) employee level, focus-
ing on workers’ experiences and perceptions. For example,
studies analyzing the impact of VR on employees’ stress
reduction or workload were included, while technological
or purely organizational aspects without a direct connec-
tion to employees were excluded.9The exclusion criterion
specifies that studies were excluded if they represented
documents such as books, glossaries, or conference reviews
where the keywords appeared incidentally, but no research
was conducted that addressed all the defined keywords in a
meaningful and systematic manner.
If all the inclusion criteria were met, and the exclusion
criteria did not apply, the result was included in the in-depth
analysis (n=60). It should be noted that abstracts were not
available for ten of the records. The literature search was
conducted by two reviewers independently of each other,
that is, blinded, to determine whether a study would be
included in our research or not. To report on the dierences
of this independent procedure (and for risk of bias assess-
ment107), we used Cohen’s kappa coecient.108 In this pro-
cess, we calculated a kappa value of 0.92, which represents
an almost perfect agreement between the author and the
reviewer, according to McHugh.108 Subsequently, disagree-
ments between the author and the reviewer concerning the
inclusion and exclusion criteria that were applied to the
studies were solved by consensus.
Following that, the 60 records were examined in full
text for eligibility. Twenty-eight records were excluded:
Thirteen did not reflect immersive environments for work
as the focus of the research, eight did not focus on QWL, one
focused on technology aspects/processes, two represented
only a research idea or abstract for a talk, one did not reflect
employees, two were not accessible, and one had an English
abstract but was written in another language (see Figure 1).
3.4 Overview of the selected articles
A total of 32 records were considered relevant and thus
examined. The publication frequency of the results by year
is shown in Figure 3. The records included 17 journal arti-
cles, 10 conference papers, two reviews, and three book
chapters.
Table 3 shows the distribution of research methods
used in the respective contributions according to the immer-
sive technology used.
To assess quality, the SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) metric
was applied, which combines citation frequency with the
prestige of citing journals, providing a transparent frame-
work for evaluating the quality of journal-based research
(e.g., Falagas et al.109). The clustering techniques and visual-
ization capabilities of SJR further enhance its suitability for
evaluating interdisciplinary research, which is particularly
Figure 3: Publication frequency by year.

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —9
Table 3: Distribution of records according to research method.
Research method AR MR VR VW Sum of records Percentage share (approx.)
Conceptual 2 4 6 18.75 %
Empirical 2 2 9 1 14 43.75 %
Experimental 1 1 6 8 25.00 %
Reviews 4 4 12.50 %
Sum 3 3 21 5 32 100.00 %
relevant for rapidly evolving fields like immersive technolo-
gies.110 While 56.25 % of the records originate from Q1 and
Q2 journals, and 9.38 % of the records are classified as Q4
journals, 34.38 % are non-indexed sources, including confer-
ence papers, grey literature, and book chapters, as shown
in Table 4. These non-indexed sources were included to
capture emerging perspectives and applied insights, reflect-
ing the growing need to address gaps in formal literature
through diverse publication types.110 This approach ensures
that both foundational and innovative contributions, often
emerging first in non-indexed formats, are represented in
this review.
3.5 Coding framework
To systematically analyze and structure the results of our
scoping review, we developed a coding framework based
on the immersive environment technologies employed. In
accordance with the presentation in Chapter 2.1 and the
identified results, these environments can be sorted into
four categories: Augmented Reality (AR), Virtual Reality
(VR), Mixed Reality (MR), and Virtual Worlds (VW). This clas-
sification allows us to examine dierent types of immersive
technologies within immersive environments specifically
and analyze their respective impacts.
In a second step, the results were structured accord-
ing to the dimensions of the QWL. As previously described
(see Chapter 2.3), there is currently no universally appli-
cable framework for comprehensively capturing QWL.
However, to enable systematic analysis, we clustered the
results according to the QWL dimensions identified in the
initial literature review, which we summarized into three
major topics: (i) Mental Health, (ii) Safety & Prevention, and
(iii) Workplace Design. Table 5 provides a summary of the
coding framework, including the definitions and character-
istics of each QWL dimension.
Figure 4 provides an overview of the relevant studies,
highlighting the research methods used, the classification of
immersive environment technologies, and the connection to
QWL.
4 Results
In the following chapter, we report the findings of the 32
studies included in our review, guided by the immersive
technologies and the QWL criteria considered. As shown in
Figure 4, of the 32 studies, 22 are VR, three are AR, three are
MR, and four are VW. Of the 21 VR results, nine are related
to mental health, six to safety and prevention, and six to
workplace design. Of the three AR results, two are associ-
ated with mental health and one with workplace design. The
three MR results pertain to safety and prevention, as well
as workplace design. The five VW results are distributed as
follows: two relate to mental health, and three to workplace
design. In total, 13 results are connected to mental health,
eight to safety and prevention, and 11 to workplace design.
The detailed results are provided below. In total, 13 results
Table 4: Quality of records according to SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) metric.
SJR best quartile AR MR VR VW Sum of records Percentage share (approx.)
Q1 9 1 10 31.25 %
Q2 3 2 2 1 8 25.00 %
Q3 0.00 %
Q4 2 1 3 9.38 %
None of these 1 8 2 11 34.38 %
Sum 3 3 21 5 32 100.00 %

10 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
Table 5: Coding framework for QWL dimensions.
Dimension Definition Characteristics/examples
Mental health Refers to employees’ psychological
well-being, stress levels, and ability to
maintain work-life balance.,,
–Reduction of stress and support for emotional recovery –
–Enhancement of psychological resilience in challenging environments,
–Support for visual comfort and reduction of fatigue in immersive environments
–Improvement of well-being through positive emotional engagement,
Safety & Prevention Involves ensuring physical and
psychological safety at the workplace to
minimize risks and hazards.,,,
–Improvement of risk awareness and hazard recognition –
–Development of safe practices and accident prevention strategies,,
–Strengthening of safety-related decision-making under stressful conditions,
–Promotion of proactive safety behavior through immersive learning,
Workplace design Refers to the physical layout and
configuration of the work environment,
including ergonomics.,,
–Design optimization for ergonomic and productivity improvements,
–Reduction of environmental distractions to improve focus and performance,
–Adaptation of workspaces to enhance user comfort and satisfaction,
–Facilitation of collaboration and interaction in work environments,
Conceptual
n = 6
Mental Health
n = 13
Safety & Prevention
n = 8
Workplace Design
n = 11
Empirical
n = 14
Reviews
n = 4
Experimental
n = 8
AR
n = 3
VR
n = 21
VW
n = 5
MR
n = 3
n = 3
n = 1
n = 3
n = 1
n = 2
n = 5
n = 3
n = 6
n = 2
n = 3
n = 3
n = 9
n = 6
n = 1
n = 6
n = 3
n = 2
n = 1
n = 2
n = 2
Figure 4: Results according to the coding framework.
are associated with Mental Health, eight with Safety & Pre-
vention, and eleven with Workplace Design. The detailed
findings are presented below.
4.1 Augmented Reality (AR)
4.1.1 Mental health
Pereira et al.127 examine the integration of AR technolo-
gies into Lean Production in Smart Factories, i.e., logis-
tic work environments, aiming to improve working con-
ditions, reduce ergonomic risks, and enhance workflow
eciency. A case study was presented to analyze the
eects of implementing AR on the work environment
and employee acceptance. By developing a methodology
called Risk Assessment for Ergonomics and Safety in Logis-
tics (RAES-Log), the study analyzed the requirements for
implementing AR to minimize existing risks and optimize
ergonomic conditions. The study emphasized the impor-
tance of employee involvement and acceptance in intro-
ducing AR technologies to develop tailored and eective
technologies. Results indicated that AR technologies have
the potential to reduce musculoskeletal disorders, improve
work quality, and increase eciency. Employees also exhib-
ited a positive attitude toward the proposed AR solutions,

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —11
suggesting that these technologies could foster employee
engagement, motivation, and well-being.127
The study by Rinnert et al.128 investigated the impact of
AR presentation of performance and internal state informa-
tion of team members on team leaders in a simulated Mixed
Reality (MR) team environment. It examines how the visu-
alization of stress information in AR aects team members’
performance and how team leaders can utilize this informa-
tion to optimize task allocation and promote team members’
well-being. Specifically, the AR presentation of stress levels
allows team leaders to identify overburdened team mem-
bers and reallocate workloads to minimize errors caused
by stress. The results show that this approach enhances
team productivity while simultaneously supporting psycho-
logical well-being. The authors suggest that AR techniques
can improve stress management and task optimization in
various dynamic work environments.128
4.1.2 Workplace design
Gerdenitsch et al.129 investigated the use of AR-based assis-
tance systems in a laboratory experiment involving assem-
bly tasks with 117 participants. The study focuses on user
experiences related to autonomy, passive work attitudes,
and responsibility. The findings indicate that participants
experienced a limited perception of autonomy, as the AR
system rigidly dictated assembly steps. This led to a pas-
sive work attitude, where participants followed instructions
without engaging in active decision-making. Despite this,
participants still attributed errors internally, highlighting
a paradox between reduced autonomy and retained per-
sonal accountability. The study underscores the importance
of designing AR systems that balance instructional guid-
ance with opportunities for user control, thereby fostering
a sense of autonomy, responsibility, and active engagement.
4.2 Mixed Reality (MR)
4.2.1 Safety & Prevention
Li et al.130 present a MR platform aimed at improving occu-
pational safety and health (OSH) through immersive train-
ing. By combining MR with Cyber-Physical Systems (CPS)
and IoT technologies, the platform enables realistic sim-
ulations of workplace hazards, allowing employees to be
trained for dangerous scenarios without facing physical
risks. The preventive approach enhances hazard awareness
and significantly reduces accidents. Additionally, ergonomic
and safety-related aspects are integrated into the design
of the work environment, improving both physical and
mental working conditions. The study highlights MR as
a valuable tool for proactive risk reduction and accident
prevention.
The study by Rauh et al.131 describes the development
and implementation of MR On-SeT, a MR platform specif-
ically designed for occupational safety training. The plat-
form utilizes technologies such as Microsoft HoloLens to
create realistic scenarios that simulate hazardous work-
place situations. This allows employees to train in a safe,
controlled environment, enabling them to identify and mit-
igate potential dangers. MR On-SeT has been deployed in
several international facilities, with over 540 employees
across dierent countries participating in the training ses-
sions. Participants found the training sessions engaging and
were able to gain valuable experience through the simu-
lation of hazards, all without being exposed to real-world
risks.
4.2.2 Workplace design
Bruno et al.51 present in their study a MR system for the
ergonomic assessment of workstations in the industrial sec-
tor. The system integrates motion capture tools, a head-
mounted display, and ergonomic analysis software to create
an immersive, realistic simulation of the work environment.
Physical prototypes, produced through 3D printing, pro-
vide haptic feedback, allowing the user to manipulate real
objects within the virtual environment. This hybrid setup
enables precise tracking of the user’s postures and move-
ments, which are then analyzed for ergonomic factors, such
as back strain or arm positioning, using the RULA (Rapid
Upper Limb Assessment) method. A case study conducted on
an automotive assembly and welding station validated the
system and highlighted potential improvements in worksta-
tion design. The findings suggest that the MR system oers
a more realistic and ecient method for ergonomic evalu-
ation and workplace optimization compared to traditional,
purely virtual approaches.
4.3 Virtual Reality (VR)
4.3.1 Mental health
Walters et al.111 investigate the eects of virtual environ-
ments on work, specifically examining the eectiveness of
a VR tourism experience in a nature-based marine setting
to promote mental well-being in the workplace. The study
employs a pre-post experimental design conducted in a lab-
oratory setting. Results show that a three-minute VR session
enhanced concentration and mental well-being, although it
did not significantly reduce mental fatigue. Walters et al.
emphasize that VR can serve as a restorative intervention

12 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
for stress management, particularly for employees with lim-
ited opportunities for regular vacations.
In their study, Balconi & Angioletti102 employ a pre-
post experimental design conducted in a laboratory setting.
Results show that a three-minute VR session enhanced con-
centration and mental well-being, although it did not signif-
icantly reduce mental fatigue. They emphasize that VR can
serve as a restorative intervention for stress management,
particularly for employees with limited opportunities for
regular vacations.
Riches et al.132 conducted a systematic review to eval-
uate the eectiveness of VR and other immersive technolo-
gies in promoting workplace well-being, identifying 17 rel-
evant studies. The findings of the review indicate that VR
has positive eects on employees’ mental well-being. Most
of the evaluated studies reported significant improvements
in stress reduction, relaxation, and overall quality of life.
However, further research is needed to validate the long-
term eectiveness and applicability of these technologies
in real-world work environments, with a focus on specific
occupational groups and natural work contexts.
In the randomized crossover study conducted by Bodet-
Contentin et al.,112 the eectiveness of 8-min VR sessions in a
nature-immersive environment on the quality of breaks for
intensive care nurses was investigated. The results indicate
that VR significantly reduces fatigue and promotes a greater
sense of detachment from the work environment during
breaks. Participants in the randomized study reported bet-
ter recovery and a potentially positive impact on their
mental health. The study underscores the importance of
structured breaks and innovative technologies in enhancing
the well-being of healthcare professionals.
The study by Skorupska et al.116 examines the use of
VR to enhance communication in high-risk, isolated envi-
ronments, specifically in a simulated lunar mission. Dur-
ing their two-week study, daily briefings conducted via
audio communication were compared to those held in VR
using Horizon Workrooms. The results demonstrate that
VR significantly improves communication quality, particu-
larly in complex discussions, by fostering a stronger sense
of shared space and emotional connection. Participants
reported higher engagement, faster-paced discussions, and
enhanced well-being following VR meetings compared to
audio-based sessions. The study suggests that VR can pro-
mote interpersonal relationships and psychological well-
being in high-risk environments such as space exploration
and calls for further research on VR in communication.
Similar to the preceding study, the study by Lyons
et al.113 investigates the implementation of VR as a psycho-
logical support tool for individuals in isolated and confined
environments, such as Mars simulations. The VR compo-
nent is utilized to provide stress-reducing, nature-based
immersive experiences, which are considered particularly
valuable in sensory-restricted environments. In qualitative
interviews, participants report a positive impact from the
VR experiences, although there is a desire for a greater
variety of content. The results indicate that the use of VR
had positive eects on the emotional well-being of the par-
ticipants, with a specific emphasis on the need for a broader
range of content. These findings also highlight the necessity
of autonomous psychological support systems in extreme
work environments to ensure mental health and eciency.
Also, Salamon et al.115 present the application of VR to
maintain the mental health of astronauts on long-duration
space missions in their paper. They argue that VR, through
the creation of immersive virtual environments, could be
an eective method for addressing isolation, sensory depri-
vation, and social monotony. The authors propose VR-based
solutions such as virtual nature, simulated social inter-
actions, and interactive entertainment media to promote
astronauts’ psychological well-being and reduce stress. The
authors call for further research to better understand the
eectiveness and practical challenges of implementing VR
in space.
Weiß & Heuten’s133 study examines the impact of vir-
tual stressors on healthcare workers in a simulated inten-
sive care unit (ICU) environment. The authors developed
a VR scenario that simulates typical stressors such as time
pressure and interruptions. In an experiment with 26 par-
ticipants, the impact of these stressors on physiological
and subjective stress levels was examined. The results indi-
cate that VR-based simulations can eectively induce stress,
particularly through interruptions and time pressure, and
can thus serve as a basis for stress-related training. By
implementing VR training, healthcare workers can be bet-
ter prepared for stressful situations, potentially leading
to improvements in mental health and overall Quality of
Working Life.
4.3.2 Workplace design
Macchi & Pisapia125 compare the eects of dierent inter-
action environments – Virtual reality, face-to-face, and
2D video conferencing – on psychological and cognitive
metrics in the workplace. The study, involving 40 partic-
ipants from an Italian electricity transmission company,
aimed to deepen the understanding of the impact of digital
communication technologies on group dynamics, cognitive
performance, and well-being in professional settings. The
findings suggest that virtual reality fosters a more collabo-
rative and peaceful environment, although initial users may

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —13
experience greater fatigue, highlighting the need for further
ergonomic advancements and user adaptation. Age-related
dierences were observed, particularly in the perception
of motivation-related and emotional exhaustion in the VR
environment. Face-to-face meetings remain the most eec-
tive in promoting flow, while VR emerges as a promising
alternative, oering immersive experiences that enhance
task significance, positive emotions, and collaboration.
The study by Simonetto et al.121 presented a method-
ological framework for integrating motion-capture systems
and VR for designing workplaces in the assembly indus-
try within the context of Industry 4.0. They emphasized
the importance of these technologies for optimizing work-
place design and performance. They developed five steps
enabling the design of workplaces that consider productiv-
ity and occupational safety, as well as the specific require-
ments of an aging workforce. The paper’s research method
was qualitative and included applying the developed frame-
work in a case study to redesign an assembly workplace for
a medium-sized pump. The results showed reduced assem-
bly times by approximately 15 % and decreased ergonomic
risks from high to medium. The work provides a com-
prehensive insight into the application of motion-capture
systems and VR for designing workplaces, demonstrat-
ing the potential of these technologies for the assembly
industry.
To examine the impacts of environments on negoti-
ations, van der Wijst et al.126 conducted an experimental
design where participants engaged in negotiations in either
an oce or beach setting within a VR laboratory. The study
analyzed how the environment influenced the mood, stress
levels, and satisfaction of negotiation participants. The
environment was realistically represented in both settings
through visual and auditory stimuli. The results indicated
that negotiations at the beach led to more positive emotions
and reduced perceived work-related stress, although no sig-
nificant dierences in negotiation outcomes were observed.
The study provides crucial insights into how the environ-
ment can influence negotiation processes and oers per-
spectives on the role of the environment in shaping success-
ful negotiations.
The study by Kiluk et al.124 examines the eects of
dierent virtual work environments on users’ flow, perfor-
mance, emotional state, and preferences. Three virtual envi-
ronments were created and evaluated through a user study
involving 15 participants: a dark room, an empty room, and
a furnished room. Although no significant dierences in
objective performance were observed between the virtual
environments in the experiment, variations in subjective
experiences and perceptions among participants were evi-
dent. Participants reported feeling less distracted and more
focused in the dark and empty rooms compared to the fur-
nished room. Notably, the empty room was associated with
the highest levels of relaxation and calmness. These findings
highlight the importance of considering user comfort and
well-being in the design of virtual work environments.
The impacts of wall colors and room temperatures
on the productivity and well-being of employees in both
real and virtual environments were investigated by Latini
et al.123 23 participants were involved in tests, performing
productivity tasks, and filling out questionnaires on ther-
mal and visual comfort. The study compared the results
between real and virtual environments and found no sig-
nificant dierences in productivity and perception ratings.
No significant eects of colors and temperatures on produc-
tivity and comfort were identified. The results support the
suitability of VR as a research technology in this field. The
study emphasizes the importance of the oce environment
for employee satisfaction and productivity, suggesting that
color design and room temperature are crucial factors to be
considered.
The study by Carnazzo et al.122 explores the integra-
tion of VR and wearable devices to improve workplace
ergonomics, particularly in the automotive industry. It
presents a Unity-based application that utilizes motion-
capturing data to enable a three-dimensional analysis of
postures in work environments. This technology allows
the incorporation of ergonomic principles in the design
phase, testing of various scenarios, and the collection of
worker feedback. This approach is crucial for preventing
musculoskeletal disorders, promoting employee health and
well-being, and enhancing productivity. Furthermore, the
findings indicate that VR and wearable sensors can also
support training and learning in the workplace.
4.3.3 Safety & Prevention
By considering geological and mining employees who work
on coal mining projects, Pamidimukkala & Kermanshachi117
developed virtual reality training programs for geological
and mining employees to facilitate the recognition of pos-
sible hazards in the workplace. They recommend repairing
or maintaining machines, observing operations, operating
haulage and utility trucks, handling tools and materials,
getting equipment on or o, conducting inspections, and
escaping hazards. They do so as they develop their VR sce-
narios using software that creates animated 3-dimensional
films that are interactive. Hence, bad and good scenar-
ios were presented to the employees, i.e., that displayed
how hazardous situations should be handled or not. The
employees had to fill out surveys about how to handle haz-
ardous situations pre- and post-training. Pamidimukkala

14 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
& Kermanshachi found that the results were better in the
post-training.
Jacobsen et al.118 developed a framework for generating
and assessing VR data that uses light detection and ranging
(LiDAR) technology to ensure construction safety training
in physical and virtual environments. They reconstructed
hazardous situations in virtual environments using physi-
cal conditions that are not harmful to the employees who
are out for training, such as walking a plank on construc-
tion sites. As their employees had to perform specific tasks
and rectify hazards during their training sessions, Jacobsen
et al.118 determined that virtual training is beneficial to rais-
ing attention towards construction site hazards and how to
rectify them.
The systematic review by Strzałkowski et al.119 exam-
ines the application of VR technologies in mining and
construction. Over 100 scientific articles were analyzed to
present the current state of research in these industries.
The results indicate a growing interest in VR technology,
highlighting its popularity and versatility. VR is understood
to improve workplace safety, increase eciency, and opti-
mize project profitability. Additionally, the review discusses
how VR can enhance work quality and employee well-being
through immersive learning opportunities and innovative
training approaches. The study provides a comprehensive
overview of VR applications in mining and construction,
identifies research gaps, and outlines future developments
in this field.
The study by Thai et al.79 investigates the integration of
eye exercises into VR sessions to enhance visual comfort. By
analyzing various exercises such as “Thumb-moving” and
“Figure-eight”, the eectiveness of “Active Breaks” for quick
eye recovery during VR experiences is examined. The study
uses objective measurements like blink rate and subjective
questionnaires, including the Computer Vision Syndrome
Questionnaire and the Simulator Sickness Questionnaire, to
assess the impact of the exercises. Although no significant
dierences were found between performing the exercises
in the real world and the VR environment, participants
preferred doing the exercises in the real world. The results
suggest that regular “Active Breaks” during VR sessions can
improve user well-being.
In their paper, Innocenti et al.120 present the ALBO
project, which utilizes game-based VR environments to
improve risk perception and well-being in the workplace.
The study examines how VR influences risk assessment by
providing an indirect, immersive experience that allows
users to challenge their usual decision-making heuris-
tics and heighten awareness of stress-related and safety-
relevant hazards, with a focus on prevention. The study
employs a multiple case study approach to transform real
work processes into VR scenarios, which are then made
interactive through an adventure-game format. While the
study is still ongoing, preliminary data suggest that these
game-based VR environments can significantly enhance
awareness of safety risks and psychosocial hazards.
Klomp et al.114 present the multiple strategies employed
by the CDC in their paper to safeguard the health, safety,
and resilience of personnel deployed during the Ebola out-
break in West Africa. The manuscript explains preemptive
training programs and post-deployment support for sta
who faced potentially traumatic and dangerous conditions.
A key component was the use of VR to simulate stressful
emergency scenarios, allowing participants to practice cop-
ing strategies in a safe, virtual environment. The focus was
on maintaining the psychological well-being and safety of
the responders, and the training was developed in close
collaboration with the Center for the Study of Traumatic
Stress to enhance the eectiveness of these interventions.
4.4 Virtual worlds
4.4.1 Mental health
Wu et al.134 examine the use of VW for social and psy-
chological support, particularly in isolated and confined
environments such as long-duration space missions to Mars.
They demonstrate that VW, in combination with Virtual
Agents (VAs), can be used to maintain social interactions,
mitigate sensory deprivation, and promote mental health.
The study introduces a virtual communication center called
the Family Communication Center (FAMCOM), which allows
users to maintain social connections through asynchronous
communication while also oering spaces for relaxation
within the virtual environment. These environments fea-
ture realistic simulations of nature experiences designed
to reduce stress and enhance feelings of connection. The
authors emphasize that the psychological benefits gained in
virtual worlds can be transferred to real life and contribute
to the maintenance of mental well-being in extreme work-
ing environments.
Continuing their research, Wu et al.135 examine the
use of Virtual Environments and Virtual Agents to sup-
port the psychosocial health of astronauts during long-term
space missions. The ANSIBLE system (A Network of Social
Interactions for Bilateral Life Enhancement) is described
as aiming to promote social interactions and enable asyn-
chronous communication through virtual environments.
This is intended to address the psychological challenges
of isolation, monotony, and sensory deprivation that occur

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —15
during long-duration spaceflights. The system oers various
strategies to combat social monotony, provide sensory stim-
ulation, and maintain psychological well-being. Key applica-
tions include the use of virtual agents for social interactions
and the provision of nature-like virtual scenarios designed
for relaxation and stress relief.
4.4.2 Workplace design
To improve developers’ productivity with workplace design,
Mehra et al.136 generated a VW allowing developers to work
in virtual environments like beaches or parks while using
their familiar development tools and sitting at their phys-
ical workplace. In its early phase, the study emphasizes
the importance of the environment for the mood and pro-
ductivity of developers. It demonstrates how a customized
virtual environment can have positive eects and improve
the well-being of developers, ultimately leading to increased
productivity.
The literature analysis by Al Harthy et al.137 explored
the impacts of the metaverse in the professional environ-
ment, emphasizing its significance for improving Work-Life
Balance, job satisfaction, and employee performance. Rec-
ommendations were provided for creating a work envi-
ronment that ensures fairness, inclusivity, and accessibil-
ity to avoid existing inequalities. Future research areas
were identified, including the investigation of the long-
term eects of the metaverse on employee well-being and
organizational outcomes. The study also highlighted the
importance of employee health in the context of the meta-
verse in the workplace. They proposed exploring the psy-
chological and social aspects influencing employees’ experi-
ences in the metaverse work environment and developing
methods to support employees in coping with stress.
The study by Rozak et al.138 examines the impact of
the metaverse as a virtual oce on human resource man-
agement practices. The authors argue that the implemen-
tation of the metaverse as a virtual oce can transform
the work environment and create new opportunities to
enhance employee well-being. They identify three strategic
approaches for leaders to eectively integrate the meta-
verse into the work environment: (i) encourage productiv-
ity, (ii) encourage flexibility, and (iii) encourage connectiv-
ity. Additionally, the significance of HR gamification as an
approach to adapting HRM practices in virtual oces is
emphasized.
Cousins & Varshney139 explore how ubiquitous com-
puting environments can support the balance between
work and personal life. By utilizing mobile technologies
and connected environments, physical and virtual spaces
can either be merged or distinctly separated, depending on
user preferences. The authors conduct qualitative case stud-
ies, demonstrating that these technologies enable users to
coordinate work and personal activities more eciently by
adjusting communication and accessibility strategies. The
paper proposes that future computing environments should
be designed to oer more flexible interfaces and contexts
to seamlessly integrate or separate work and life spaces
according to individual needs.
5 Discussion
Our study employed the scoping review methodology
according to Arksey and O’Malley105 to investigate the
impact of work in immersive environments on the QWL,
based on the immersive technology used, utilizing the
PRISMA framework.33 In total, 32 relevant studies were
identified. The results show dierent dimensions of QWL
and were clustered into three main topics: mental health,
safety, and workplace design. The investigation revealed
that immersive technologies such as VR, MR, AR, and VW
could contribute to improving QWL.
The identified studies showed that AR generates added
value in workplace design and ergonomic design in partic-
ular, as it can reduce physical stress on employees. These
studies focus specifically on the physical aspects, such as
musculoskeletal disorders,127 but less on potential advan-
tages, such as stress reduction through assisted work pro-
cesses. Accordingly, it remains unclear at this stage to what
extent AR can promote mental health in the workplace
in the longer term. Furthermore, according to Gerdenitsch
et al., further studies are needed to clarify how AR can
be designed to promote autonomy and a sense of respon-
sibility among employees.129 In this context, AR applica-
tions that dynamically reallocate tasks based on visual-
ized workload data have shown potential for improving
stress management and coordination.129,130 Future research
should explore how these approaches can be systematically
designed to enhance both physical and mental well-being.
MR oers the potential for improving the QWL of
employees through the seamless merging of the real and
virtual worlds, particularly in Safety & Prevention. Studies
such as those by Li et al. and Rauh et al. show that MR
technologies can implement immersive training and hazard
prevention in a realistic way, which helps reduce work-
place accidents.130,131 However, there is a gap in research
on how MR aects mental health in the long term, espe-
cially in highly stressful work environments. While VR is
increasingly used for stress-reducing interventions,102,111,115
the potential role of MR is not yet well understood. Future
research should address how MR-based training tools can

16 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
simultaneously enhance physical safety and psychological
resilience, particularly in hazardous workplaces.130,131
The results show that VR can promote mental health,
compared to AR and MR. Thus, VR environments, such
as immersive nature experiences, can be eectively used
for stress management and recreation in the workplace
and thus achieve short-term improvements in well-being,
especially in occupations with high-stress levels.102,111 These
results are consistent with previous research and suggest
that rapidly switching between virtual environments in
work and leisure contexts can positively influence employee
well-being.31,77 However, the identified studies focus on
Table 6: Future research directions.
QWL dimension Immersive
technology
Research questions
Mental health AR How can AR technologies be designed to promote autonomy and a sense of responsibility among
employees?
How can AR-enabled processes improve coordination and reduce stress by dynamically reallocating tasks?
MR What role does MR play in managing stress and improving mental well-being in high-stress work
environments?
How can MR-based tools dynamically adapt workflows to reduce stress and enhance employee engagement?
VR What are the long-term effects of integrating VR-based stress management interventions into daily work
routines?
How can VR enhance social interaction and collaboration between remote teams in hybrid work models?
How can long-term exposure to VR environments influence user acceptance and emotional well-being?
How can VR-based interventions be tailored to address job-specific stress factors in diverse occupational
settings?
VW How can virtual worlds foster social interactions and reduce stress without introducing new stressors such
as technology overload?
How can virtual worlds enhance collaboration and reduce isolation in distributed and hybrid teams?
What are the challenges in integrating virtual worlds into the everyday workflows of hybrid teams,
considering individual preferences and acceptance?
Safety & Prevention AR What role can AR play in improving situational awareness and preventing physical risks in hazardous
workplaces?
How can AR-based safety training be tailored to specific industries to enhance risk perception and
preparedness?
MR How effective are complex MR-based hazard simulations in preparing employees for both physical and
psychological risks?
How can MR technologies address cognitive overload while providing immersive safety training?
VR How can VR simulations effectively train employees for high-risk tasks while maintaining engagement and
retention?
How can VR-based safety training compare to traditional methods in terms of learning retention and
practical application?
How can collaboration design in VR improve hazard communication and decision-making?
Workplace design AR How can AR technologies be designed to promote autonomy and responsibility while enhancing workplace
processes?
How can AR improve ergonomic workplace design while supporting diverse user groups?
MR How can MR tools support the development of ergonomic workplace designs that reduce physical strain?
How can MR-based workplace tools integrate real-time feedback to optimize ergonomic workflows?
VR How can VR enable the customization of workspaces to improve productivity and reduce distractions in
hybrid work settings?
How can VR enhance team collaboration and ergonomic planning through shared virtual environments?
VW How can virtual worlds improve collaboration in hybrid teams while enhancing workplace design?
How can virtual workspaces be personalized to enhance comfort and engagement for diverse user groups?
How can virtual worlds support workplace design by adapting to different work tasks and user needs?
How can virtual worlds enhance the efficiency of hybrid work models by seamlessly integrating physical and
virtual work environments?
How can the use of virtual worlds as part of hybrid work models influence workplace satisfaction and design
flexibility over the long term, considering their potential for personalized workflows and seamless
integration of physical and virtual environments?

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —17
short-term VR interventions. It remains unclear whether
these short-term positive eects also persist in the longer
term and how they can be integrated into the daily routine
of workers. For instance, structured workflows in VR have
been shown to reduce work-related stress by enhancing
collaboration.60,130 Future research should examine how VR
interventions can be embedded into everyday workflows
to ensure sustained benefits. VR also plays a central role
in QWL in terms of safety and prevention. The technol-
ogy is increasingly being used to train workers in high-risk
occupations, as it enables safe, realistic simulation of dan-
gerous work situations and can help reduce occupational
accidents.117 In workplace design, VR also oers possibilities
that can impact QWL. In terms of workplace design, creating
virtual workspaces that can be individually adapted to the
needs of employees increases satisfaction and productiv-
ity, particularly in globally networked companies or hybrid
work models.125 Hence, researching how VR can improve
social interaction and collaboration between remote teams,
especially considering the potential of metaverse platforms,
is important.
VW enabled by metaverse platforms, oer a new
dimension for workplace design and psychological well-
being. They not only enable the personalization of work
environments but also new forms of social interaction,
which are particularly important in isolated work environ-
ments.134,135 Nevertheless, research in this area is still in its
infancy. While there is some evidence that virtual worlds
can reduce stress and promote social well-being, compre-
hensive studies on the long-term psychological eects of VW
on employees in regular work environments are still lack-
ing. Additionally, future research should investigate how
virtual worlds can be designed to support collaboration and
reduce isolation while managing the risks of “always-on”
connectivity.31
A comparative look at the immersive technologies
regarding QWL shows that each immersive technology
oers specific strengths and weaknesses. Based on the find-
ings, AR significantly benefits ergonomic workplace design
by reducing physical strain, but its eects on mental health
are not yet well understood. MR, on the other hand, shows
great potential in implementing realistic safety training
and accident prevention, yet there is a lack of studies on
its long-term eects on mental health. VR stands out par-
ticularly in the field of mental health, as it can conduct
stress-reducing interventions and improve well-being in the
short term. However, it remains unclear how these eects
can be integrated into the daily work routine in the long
term. Finally, VW oers new possibilities for workplace
design and social interactions, especially in isolated work
environments. However, comprehensive studies on the
long-term psychological eects in regular work settings are
still lacking.
Trust is a crucial aspect, which is why immersive tech-
nologies should be tested in advance, in contrast to the
abrupt switch to teleworking during the global SARS-CoV-
2 pandemic. To build trust, the ability to connect with
others in an immersive environment that makes interac-
tions feel real and meaningful plays an important role in
reducing uncertainty, as shown in the study by Srivastava
&Chandra.
77 Previous research also shows that employ-
ees who use virtual worlds in their free time are well
able to assess their suitability for the workplace and con-
tribute to their dissemination within the company,60 which
may also apply to immersive technologies and should be
investigated.
Our results highlight several future research topics
summarized in Table 6, with potential research questions.
Answering these questions can be very helpful for science
and practice to create an adequate virtual, immersive world
for employees, aiming to attract and retain talent in the
context of the war for talent.
6 Conclusions
This paper has addressed the impact of immersive envi-
ronments, according to the technologies AR, VR, MR, and
VW, on QWL. The findings suggest that immersive tech-
nologies oer promising opportunities to enhance various
dimensions of QWL, summarized as (i) Mental Health, (ii)
Safety & Prevention, and (iii) Workplace Design. However,
the results also reveal significant research gaps that need
to be addressed to fully understand the long-term eects of
these technologies on the work environment.
6.1 Theoretical implications
First, we contribute to the existing research by providing
a first analysis of the impact of immersive environments
on QWL. The analysis is based on a scoping review that
provides insights into the existing literature. Second, we
present a research agenda to guide future research direc-
tions. Since there are not many studies, especially given the
novelty of immersive virtual worlds in relation to QWL, this
agenda is of significant importance and should be consid-
ered before emerging virtual worlds such as Metaverses
are developed and introduced into new work contexts. Fur-
thermore, potential negative aspects of introducing immer-
sive virtual technologies in the work context should be
considered since the identified research on this topic has

18 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
been predominately positive. These concerns, for example,
include the problems with VR and AR that can lead to
“cybersickness” and “motion sickness.” Third, our analysis
provides a framework for topics on QWL in future work
contexts in immersive environments. It enables research
questions to be consolidated and the field to be further
developed.
6.2 Practical implications
Our findings contribute to companies and society in several
ways. First, the results are particularly relevant for compa-
nies. They highlight which technologies are most eective
for specific aspects of promoting QWL. Our findings stress
the importance of designing immersive environments that
support well-structured collaborative processes, which are
key to leveraging their potential benefits for QWL, includ-
ing stress reduction and improved team dynamics. Com-
panies can use these technologies strategically to optimize
work environments, reduce stress, and prevent accidents,
especially in safety-critical areas. Notably, VR is particularly
promising for stress reduction in high-stress scenarios.
Furthermore, it becomes clear that companies should
experiment with XR technologies, in general, before imple-
menting VW to identify and respond to potential risks asso-
ciated with these technologies early on. It is not time to wait
until rigorous results are available from research; instead,
ideas should be tested depending on the work environment.
Second, we have demonstrated that immersive environ-
ments have the potential to reduce stress and promote well-
being not only in the workplace but also in other societal
areas. The research findings provide insights into the trans-
formation of the working world through immersive envi-
ronments. This is especially relevant for discussions about
the future of workplace design and safety, particularly in
an increasingly digitalized and globalized world. Finally,
our findings oer individuals the opportunity to consciously
choose companies that use these technologies to enhance
their personal QWL.
6.3 Limitations
As with any research, our study has limitations. First, the
search string used is limited to the keywords used. There
may be other relevant terms that would identify other rele-
vant articles. Second, we did not use a holistic framework, as
one does not yet exist for QWL. We developed our own, but
the accuracy could be improved by using a validated frame-
work. Third, a considerable of the focus is on the short-
term eects of immersive technologies on mental health,
safety, and workplace design. Long-term eects, such as the
continued use of XR technologies or working in virtual
worlds and their potential negative eects (e.g., technology
fatigue), remain uninvestigated, as indicated by our results.
Acknowledgment: The authors would like to thank the
master’s students Ms. Zvenyhorodska, Ms. Kakavand, and
Mr. Mohammadian for their support in preparing the final
research protocol in the form of our Appendix. We would
also like to thank Mrs. Ina Krauledat-Gray from the Lan-
guage Center at the Wismar University of Applied Sciences
for proofreading our text for grammar and spelling.
Research ethics: Not applicable.
Informed consent: Not applicable.
Author contributions: All authors have accepted responsi-
bility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved
its submission.
Use of Large Language Models, AI and Machine Learning
Tools: During the preparation of this paper, the authors
used Grammarly AI for Microsoft Word (version 6.8.263)
and ChatGPT (version 3.5) to improve the language and
readability of this article. After using these tools, the content
was reviewed and edited.
Conflict of interest: The authors state no conflict of interest.
Research funding: None declared.
Data availability: The data that support the findings
of this study are openly available in Open Science
Framework (OSF) at https://osf.io/g98bv/?view_only=
cca74349eed145ad925eccdb19c26d13.
References
1. Richter, S.; Richter, A. What Is Novel about the Metaverse? Int. J.
Inf. Manag. 2023,73, 102684; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt
.2023.102684.
2. Dwivedi, Y. K.; Hughes, L.; Baabdullah, A. M.; Ribeiro-Navarrete, S.;
Giannakis, M.; Al-Debei, M. M.; Dennehy, D.; Metri, B.; Buhalis, D.;
Cheung, C. M. K.; Conboy, K.; Doyle, R.; Dubey, R.; Dutot, V.; Felix,
R.; Goyal, D. P.; Gustafsson, A.; Hinsch, C.; Jebabli, I.; Janssen, M.;
Kim, Y.-G.; Kim, J.; Koos, S.; Kreps, D.; Kshetri, N.; Kumar, V.; Ooi,
K.-B.; Papagiannidis, S.; Pappas, I. O.; Polyviou, A.; Park, S.-M.;
Pandey, N.; Queiroz, M. M.; Raman, R.; Rauschnabel, P. A.; Shirish,
A.; Sigala, M.; Spanaki, K.; Tan, G. W. H.; Tiwari, M. K.; Viglia, G.;
Wamba, S. F. Metaverse beyond the Hype: Multidisciplinary
Perspectives on Emerging Challenges, Opportunities, and
Agenda for Research, Practice and Policy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2022,
66, 102542; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2022.102542.
3. Barteit, S.; Lanfermann, L.; Bärnighausen, T.; Neuhann, F.;
Beiersmann, C. Augmented, Mixed, and Virtual Reality-Based
Head-Mounted Devices for Medical Education: Systematic
Review. JMIR Serious Games 2021,9(3), e29080; https://doi.org/10
.2196/29080.
4. Holuša, V.; Vaněk, M.; Beneš, F.; Švub, J.; Staša, P. Virtual Reality as
a Tool for Sustainable Training and Education of Employees in

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —19
Industrial Enterprises. Sustainability 2023,15 (17), 12886; https://
doi.org/10.3390/su151712886.
5. Trindade, N. V.; Ferreira, A.; Pereira, J. M. Beyond the Screen:
Reshaping the Workplace with Virtual and Augmented Reality,
arXiv 2023.
6. Chen, J.; Xi, N.; Pohjonen, V.; Hamari, J. Paying Attention in
Metaverse: an Experiment on Spatial Attention Allocation in
Extended Reality Shopping. ITP 2023,36 (8), 255−283;.
7. Chu, C.-H.; Chen, Y.-A.; Huang, Y.-Y.; Lee, Y.-J. A Comparative Study
of Virtual Footwear Try-On Applications in Virtual and Augmented
Reality. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng. 2022,22 (4); https://doi.org/10
.1115/1.4053328.
8. Wang, H.; Ning, H.; Lin, Y.; Wang, W.; Dhelim, S.; Farha, F.; Ding, J.;
Daneshmand, M. A Survey on the Metaverse: The
State-of-The-Art, Technologies, Applications, and Challenges. IEEE
Internet Things J. 2023,10 (16), 14671−14688;.
9. Dincelli, E.; Yayla, A. Immersive Virtual Reality in the Age of the
Metaverse: A Hybrid-Narrative Review Based on the Technology
Affordance Perspective. J. Strateg. Inf. Syst. 2022,31 (2), 101717;
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsis.2022.101717.
10. Vatiero, M. Smart Contracts vs Incomplete Contracts: A
Transaction Cost Economics Viewpoint. Comput. Law Secur. Rev.
2022,46, 105710; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2022.105710.
11. Oppenlaender, J. The Perception of Smart Contracts for
Governance of the Metaverse. In Proceedings of the 25th
International Academic Mindtrek Conference; ACM: New York, NY,
USA, 2022; pp. 1−8.
12. Park, H.; Ahn, D.; Lee, J. Towards a Metaverse Workspace:
Opportunities, Challenges, and Design Implications. In
Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems; Schmidt, A.; Väänänen, K.; Goyal, T.;
Kristensson, P. O.; Peters, A.; Mueller, S.; Williamson, J. R.; Wilson,
M. L., Eds.; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2023; pp. 1−20.
13. Dolata, M.; Schwabe, G. What Is the Metaverse and Who Seeks to
Define it? Mapping the Site of Social Construction. J. Inf. Technol.
2023,38 (3), 239−266;.
14. Hwang, G.-J.; Chien, S.-Y. Definition, Roles, and Potential Research
Issues of the Metaverse in Education: An Artificial Intelligence
Perspective. Comput. Educ.: Artif. Intell. 2022,3, 100082; https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100082.
15. Wang, P.; Wu, P.; Wang, J.; Chi, H.-L.; Wang, X. A Critical Review of
the Use of Virtual Reality in Construction Engineering Education
and Training. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018,15 (6), 1204;
.
16. Milgram, P.; Takemura, H.; Utsumi, A.; Kishino, F. Augmented
Reality: A Class of Displays on the Reality-Virtuality Continuum. In
Telemanipulator and Telepresence Technologies; Das, H., Ed.; SPIE,
1995; pp. 282−292.
17. Peppoloni, L.; Brizzi, F.; Ruffaldi, E.; Avizzano, C. A. Augmented
Reality-Aided Tele-Presence System for Robot Manipulation in
Industrial Manufacturing. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM
Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology; Zhao, Q.;
Thalmann, D.; Spencer, S. N.; Wu, E.; Lin, M. C.; Wang, L., Eds.;
ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2015; pp. 237−240.
18. Nanjundeswaraswamy, T. S.; Swamy, D. R. Quality of Worklife of
Employees in Private Technical Institutions. Int. J. Qual. Res. 2013
(7), 3−14.
19. Walton, R. E. Quality of Working Life: what Is it. Sloan Manag. Rev.
1973,15 (1), 11−21.
20. Felce, D.; Perry, J. Quality of Life: its Definition and Measurement.
Res. Dev. Disabil. 1995,16 (1), 51−74;.
21. Hackman, J. R.; Oldham, G. R. Development of the Job Diagnostic
Survey. J. Appl. Psychol. 1975,60 (2), 159−170;.
22. Hackman, J. R.; Oldham, G. R. Work Redesign. Addison-Wesley Series
on Organization Development; Addison-Wesley: Reading, Mass,
1980.
23. Sirgy, M. J.; Efraty, D.; Siegel, P.; Lee, D.-J. A New Measure of
Quality of Work Life (QWL) Based on Need Satisfaction and
Spillover Theories. Soc. Indic. Res. 2001,55 (3), 241−302;.
24. Leitão, J.; Pereira, D.; Gonçalves, Â. Quality of Work Life and
Contribution to Productivity: Assessing the Moderator Effects of
Burnout Syndrome. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021,18 (5),
2425;
.
25. Caserman, P.; Garcia-Agundez, A.; Gámez Zerban, A.; Göbel, S.
Cybersickness in Current-Generation Virtual Reality
Head-Mounted Displays: Systematic Review and Outlook. Virtual
Reality 2021,25 (4), 1153−1170;.
26. Smith, S. P.; Burd, E. L. Response Activation and Inhibition after
Exposure to Virtual Reality. Array 2019,3−4, 100010; https://doi
.org/10.1016/j.array.2019.100010.
27. Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy. The Safety
of Domestic Virtual Reality Systems. A Literature Review;BEIS
Research Paper, 2020.
28. Hoegl, M.; Gemuenden, H. G. Teamwork Quality and the Success
of Innovative Projects: A Theoretical Concept and Empirical
Evidence. Organ. Sci. 2001,12 (4), 435−449;.
29. Moser, I.; Chiquet, S.; Strahm, S. K.; Mast, F. W.; Bergamin, P.
Group Decision-Making in Multi-User Immersive Virtual Reality.
Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2020,23 (12), 846−853;.
30. Šímová, T.; Zychová, K.; Fejfarová, M. Metaverse in the Virtual
Workplace. Vision J. Bus. Perspect. 2024,28 (1), 19−34;.
31. Chandra, S.; Srivastava, S.; Theng, Y.-L. Cognitive Absorption and
Trust for Workplace Collaboration in Virtual Worlds: An
Information Processing Decision Making Perspective. JAIS 2012,
13 (10), 797−835;.
32. Schöbel, S. M.; Tingelhoff, F. Overcoming Challenges to Enable
the Potential of Metaverse Platforms: A Qualitative Approach to
Understand Value Creation. AIS Trans. on Hum.-Comput. 2023,15
(15), 1−21;.
33. Page, M. J.; McKenzie, J. E.; Bossuyt, P. M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann,
T. C.; Mulrow, C. D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J. M.; Akl, E. A.;
Brennan, S. E.; Chou, R.; Glanville, J.; Grimshaw, J. M.;
Hróbjartsson, A.; Lalu, M. M.; Li, T.; Loder, E. W.; Mayo-Wilson, E.;
McDonald, S.; McGuinness, L. A.; Stewart, L. A.; Thomas, J.; Tricco,
A. C.; Welch, V. A.; Whiting, P.; Moher, D. The PRISMA 2020
Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic
Reviews. Syst. Rev. 2021,10 (1), 89;
.
34. Garavand, A.; Aslani, N. Metaverse Phenomenon and its Impact
on Health: A Scoping Review. Inform. Med. Unlocked 2022,32,
101029; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imu.2022.101029.
35. Tukur, M.; Schneider, J.; Househ, M.; Dokoro, A. H.; Ismail, U. I.;
Dawaki, M.; Agus, M. The Metaverse Digital Environments: a
Scoping Review of the Challenges, Privacy and Security Issues.
Front. Big Data 2023,6, 1301812; https://doi.org/10.3389/fdata
.2023.1301812.
36. Wu, T.-C.; Ho, C.-T. B. A Scoping Review of Metaverse in
Emergency Medicine. Australas. Emerg. Care 2023,26 (1), 75−83;.

20 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
37. Daling, L. M.; Schlittmeier, S. J. Effects of Augmented
Reality-Virtual Reality-And Mixed Reality-Based Training on
Objective Performance Measures and Subjective Evaluations in
Manual Assembly Tasks: A Scoping Review. Hum. Factors 2024,66
(2), 589−626;.
38. Slater, M.; Usoh, M. Presence in Immersive Virtual Environments.
In Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International
Symposium; IEEE, 1993; pp. 90−96.
39. Smith, J. W. Immersive Virtual Environment Technology to
Supplement Environmental Perception, Preference and Behavior
Research: A Review with Applications. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public
Health 2015,12 (9), 11486−11505;.
40. Fadzli, F. E.; Kamson, M. S.; Ismail, A. W.; Aladin, M. Y. F. 3D
Telepresence for Remote Collaboration in Extended Reality (xR)
Application. IOP Conf. Ser.:Mater. Sci. Eng. 2020,979 (1), 12005;
https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/979/1/012005.
41. Aguayo, C. Mixed Reality (XR) Research and Practice. PJTEL 2021,3
(1), 41−42;.
42. Rubio-Tamayo, J.; Gertrudix Barrio, M.; García García, F.
Immersive Environments and Virtual Reality: Systematic Review
and Advances in Communication, Interaction and Simulation. MTI
2017,1(4), 21;
.
43. Ratcliffe, J.; Soave, F.; Bryan-Kinns, N.; Tokarchuk, L.;
Farkhatdinov, I. Extended Reality (XR) Remote Research: a Survey
of Drawbacks and Opportunities. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; Kitamura, Y.;
Quigley, A.; Isbister, K.; Igarashi, T.; Bjørn, P.; Drucker, S., Eds.;
ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2021; pp. 1−13.
44. Vasarainen, M.; Paavola, S.; Vetoshkina, L. A Systematic Literature
Review on Extended Reality: Virtual, Augmented and Mixed
Reality in Working Life. IJVR 2021,21 (2), 1−28;.
45. Wu, C.; Huang, M.; Sun, W.; Yang, R. Feeling of Control in
Augmented Reality and Virtual Reality for Virtual Object
Manipulation. In 2023 9th International Conference on Virtual
Reality (ICVR); IEEE, 2023; pp. 193−199.
46. Kurilovas, E. Evaluation of Quality and Personalisation of
VR/AR/MR Learning Systems. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2016,35 (11),
998−1007;.
47. Venkatesan, M.; Mohan, H.; Ryan, J. R.; Schürch, C. M.; Nolan, G.
P.; Frakes, D. H.; Coskun, A. F. Virtual and Augmented Reality for
Biomedical Applications. Cell Rep. Med. 2021,2(7), 100348;
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xcrm.2021.100348.
48. Milgram, P.; Kishino, F. A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual
Displays. IEICE Trans. Inf. Syst. 1994 (77), 1321−1329.
49. Azuma, R. T. A Survey of Augmented Reality. Presence:
Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 1997,6(4), 355−385;.
50. Azimi, E.; Winkler, A.; Tucker, E.; Qian, L.; Doswell, J.; Navab, N.;
Kazanzides, P. Can Mixed-Reality Improve the Training of Medical
Procedures? Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 2018,2018,
4065−4068;.
51. Bruno, F.; Barbieri, L.; Muzzupappa, M. A Mixed Reality System for
the Ergonomic Assessment of Industrial Workstations. Int. J.
Interact. Des. Manuf. 2020,14 (3), 805−812;.
52. Burdea, G. C.; Coiffet, P. Virtual Reality Technology,3.Aufl;John
Wiley & Sons Incorporated: Newark, 2024.
53. Ball, M. The Metaverse. And How it Will Revolutionize Everything;
Liveright Publishing Corporation a Division of W.W. Norton &
Company: New York, NY, 2022.
54. Cheng, S., Ed. Metaverse: Concept, Content and Context,1.Aufl;
Springer Nature Switzerland; Imprint Springer: Cham, 2023.
55. Müller, W.; Richter, S.; Leyer, M.; Richter, A. Metaverse, Ubi Es? A
Transaction Cost-Based Analysis of the State of the Art of Smart
Contracts in the Metaverse 57th Hawaii International Conference
on System Sciences. In HICSS 2024, Hilton Hawaiian Village Waikiki
Beach Resort: Hawaii, USA, 2024; pp. 5038−5047. January 3 −6,
2024.
56. Choi, H.-Y. Working in the Metaverse: Does Telework in a
Metaverse Office Have the Potential to Reduce Population
Pressure in Megacities? Evidence from Young Adults in Seoul,
South Korea. Sustainability 2022,14 (6), 3629;
.
57. e DDV (Hrsg). Dialogmarketing Perspektiven 2022/2023. In
Tagungsband 15. wissenschaftlicher interdisziplinärer Kongress für
Dialogmarketing; Research. Springer Gabler: Wiesbaden,
Heidelberg, 2023.
58. Owens, D.; Mitchell, A.; Khazanchi, D.; Zigurs, I. An Empirical
Investigation of Virtual World Projects and Metaverse Technology
Capabilities. SIGMIS Database 2011,42 (1), 74−101;.
59. Nickerson, J. V.; Seidel, S.; Yepes, G.; Berente, N. Design Principles
for Coordination in the Metaverse. Proceedings 2022,2022 (1);
https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2022.15178.
60. Nevo, S.; Nevo, D.; Kim, H. From Recreational Applications to
Workplace Technologies: An Empirical Study of Cross-Context IS
Continuance in the Case of Virtual Worlds. J. Inf. Technol. 2012,27
(1), 74−86;.
61. Santana, M.; Cobo, M. J. What Is the Future of Work? A Science
Mapping Analysis. Eur. Manag. J. 2020,38 (6), 846−862;.
62. Battisti, E.; Alfiero, S.; Leonidou, E. Remote Working and Digital
Transformation during the COVID-19 Pandemic:
Economic-Financial Impacts and Psychological Drivers for
Employees. J. Bus. Res. 2022,150,38
−50;.
63. Antón-Sancho, Á.; Fernández-Arias, P.; Vergara-Rodríguez, D.
Impact of the Covid-19 Pandemic on the Use of ICT Tools in
Science and Technology Education. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 2023,13
(1), 130;
.
64. Brasse, J.; Förster, M.; Hühn, P.; Klier, J.; Klier, M.; Moestue, L.
Preparing for the Future of Work: a Novel Data-Driven Approach
for the Identification of Future Skills. J. Bus. Econ. 2024,94 (3),
467−500;.
65. World Economic Forum. Future of Jobs Report 2023; World
Economic Forum: Geneva, Switzerland, 2023. https://www
.weforum.org/publications/the-future-of-jobs-report-2023/.
66. Thornhill-Miller, B.; Camarda, A.; Mercier, M.; Burkhardt, J.-M.;
Morisseau, T.; Bourgeois-Bougrine, S.; Vinchon, F.; El Hayek, S.;
Augereau-Landais, M.; Mourey, F.; Feybesse, C.; Sundquist, D.;
Lubart, T. Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and
Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st
Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education. J. Intell. 2023,
11 (3), 54;
.
67. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
Future of Work and Skills. In Paper Presented at the 2nd Meeting of
the G20 Employment Working Group, 2017.
68. Chalutz Ben-Gal, H. Fit in the Future of Work 2050: Towards a
Person-Skills Fit Perspective. SSRN J. 2020;https://doi.org/10
.2139/ssrn.3657080.
69. Kiss, L.; Hamornik, B. P.; Koles, M.; Baranyi, P.; Galambos, P.;
Persa, G. Training of Business Skills in Virtual Reality. In 2015 6th

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —21
IEEE International Conference on Cognitive Infocommunications
(CogInfoCom); IEEE, 2015; pp. 215−216.
70. Doroudian, S. Collaboration in Immersive Environments:
Challenges and Solutions. arXiv, 2023.
71. Solska, D. Traversing the Metaverse: the New Frontiers for
Computer-Mediated Communication and Natural Language
Processing. Forum Filologiczne Ateneum 2022,1(10), 27−38;.
72. Quintela, I.; Aguirrezabal, P.; Serrano, R.; Barayazarra, G.; Conde,
L. Exploring the Metaverse: Mixed and Virtual Reality for
Collaborative Interaction in an Electrical Substation. In The 28th
International ACM Conference on 3D Web Technology; Posada, J.;
Moreno, A.; Jaspe, A.; Muñoz-Pandiella, I.; Stricker, D.; Mouton, C.;
Mohammed, A.; Elizalde, A., Eds.; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2023;
pp. 1−2.
73. Apker, J.; Propp, K. M.; Zabava Ford, W. S.; Hofmeister, N.
Collaboration, Credibility, Compassion, and Coordination:
Professional Nurse Communication Skill Sets in Health Care Team
Interactions. J. Prof. Nurs. 2006,22 (3), 180−189;.
74. Men, L.; Bryan-Kinns, N.; Bryce, L. Designing Spaces to Support
Collaborative Creativity in Shared Virtual Environments.
PeerJ Comput. Sci. 2019,5, e229; https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs
.229.
75. Kim,M.;Park,K.-B.;Choi,S.H.;Lee,J.Y.;Kim,D.Y.AR/VR-Based
Live Manual for User-Centric Smart Factory Services. In Advances
in Production Management Systems. Smart Manufacturing for
Industry 4.0, Bd 536; Moon, I.; Lee, G. M.; Park, J.; Kiritsis, D.;
Cieminski, G., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: Cham,
2018; pp. 417−421.
76. Herrera, L. M. M.; Abalo, M. A.; Ordóñez, S. J. Learning Calculus
with Augmented Reality and Virtual Environments. In Proceedings
of the 2019 11th International Conference on Education Technology
and Computers; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2019; pp. 18−22.
77. Srivastava, S. C.; Chandra, S. Social Presence in Virtual World
Collaboration: An Uncertainty Reduction Perspective Using a
Mixed Methods Approach. MISQ 2018,42 (3), 779−803;.
78. Purdy, M. How the Metaverse Could Change Work, 2022.
Available from: https://hbr.org/2022/04/how-the-metaverse-
could-change-work.
79. Thai, K. T. P.; Jung, S.; Lindeman, R. W. On the Use of “Active
Breaks” to Perform Eye Exercises for More Comfortable VR
Experiences. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User
Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW); IEEE, 2020;
pp. 468−476.
80. McKinsey & Company. Value Creation in the Metaverse. The Real
Business of the Virtual World; McKinsey & Company: New York, US,
2022. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/growth-
marketing-and-sales/ourinsights/value-creation-in-the-
metaverse.
81. Hopkins, J.; Bardoel, A. The Future Is Hybrid: How Organisations
Are Designing and Supporting Sustainable Hybrid Work Models
in Post-Pandemic Australia. Sustainability 2023,15 (4), 3086;
.
82. Shravanthi, A. R.; Deshmukh, S.; Deepa, N. Work Life Balance of
Women in India. Int. J. Res. Manage. Sci. 2013,2013 (1), 47−56.
83. Cho, H. Y.; Lee, H.-J. Digital Transformation for Efficient
Communication in the Workplace: Analyzing the Flow Coworking
Tool. Bus. Commun. Res. Pract. 2022,5(1), 20−28;.
84. Grubert, J.; Ofek, E.; Pahud, M.; Kristensson, P. O. The Office of the
Future: Virtual, Portable, and Global. IEEE Comput. Graph. Appl.
2018,38 (6), 125−133;.
85. Radonic, M.; Vukmirovic, V.; Milos, M. The Impact of Hybrid
Workplace Models on Intangible Assets: The Case of an Emerging
Country. AE 2021,23 (58), 770;
.
86. Rose, R. C.; Beh, L.; Uli, J.; Idris, K. Quality of Work Life:
Implications of Career Dimensions. J. Soc. Sci. 2006,2(2), 61−67;.
87. Guest, D. E. Quality of Working Life. In Oxford Research
Encyclopedia of Psychology; Guest, D. E., Ed.; Oxford University
Press, 2022.
88. Abdullah, N. A. C.; Zakaria, N.; Zahoor, N. Developments in Quality
of Work-Life Research and Directions for Future Research. SAGE
Open 2021,11 (4), 215824402110591; https://doi.org/10.1177/
21582440211059177.
89. Muskat, B.; Reitsamer, B. F. Quality of Work Life and Generation Y.
PR 2020,49 (1), 265−283;.
90. Warr, P.; Cook, J.; Wall, T. Scales for the Measurement of Some
Work Attitudes and Aspects of Psychological Well-being. J. Occup.
Psychol. 1979,52 (2), 129−148;.
91. Raj Adhikari, D.; Gautam, D. K. Labor Legislations for Improving
Quality of Work Life in Nepal. Int. J. Law Manag. 2010,52 (1),
40−53;.
92. Mirvis, P. H.; Lawler, E. E. Accounting for the Quality of Work Life.
J. Organ. Behav. 1984,5(3), 197−212;.
93. Baba, V. V.; Jamal, M. Routinization of Job Context and Job
Content as Related to Employees’ Quality of Working Life: A Study
of Canadian Nurses. J. Organ. Behav. 1991,12 (5), 379−386;.
94. Moradi, T.; Maghaminejad, F.; Azizi-Fini, I. Quality of Working Life
of Nurses and its Related Factors. Nurs. Midwifery Stud. 2014,3(2),
e19450; https://doi.org/10.17795/nmsjournal19450.
95. Ellis, N.; Pompili, A. Quality of Working Life for Nurses. Report on
Qualitative Research; Commonwealth Dept. of Health and Ageing:
Canberra, 2002.
96. Dormann, C.; Zapf, D. Job Satisfaction: a Meta-analysis of
Stabilities. J. Organ. Behav. 2001,22 (5), 483−504;.
97. Yang, J.-T. Antecedents and Consequences of Job Satisfaction in
the Hotel Industry. Int. J. Hosp. Manag. 2010,29 (4), 609−619;.
98. Near, J. P.; Rice, R. W.; Hunt, R. G. The Relationship between Work
and Nonwork Domains: A Review of Empirical Research. AMR
1980,5(3), 415−429;.
99. Kabanoff, B. Work and Nonwork: A Review of Models, Methods,
and Findings. Psychol. Bull. 1980,88 (1), 60−77;.
100. Lawler, E. E. Strategies for Improving the Quality of Work Life. Am.
Psychol. 1982,37 (5), 486−493;.
101. Rulita Jati, H. S. A. Quality of Work Life: A Literature Review. IJRISS
2022,06 (12), 154−158;.
102. Balconi, M.; Angioletti, L. Un-Stressed Mind: Neuroscientific
Applications for Stress Management at the Workplace; Neuroscience
Research Progress Ser. Nova Science Publishers Incorporated:
New York, 2021.
103. Mosadeghrad, A. M. Quality of Working Life: an Antecedent to
Employee Turnover Intention. Int. J. Health Policy Manag. 2013,1
(1), 43−50;.
104. Beechler, S.; Woodward, I. C. The Global “War for Talent”. J. Int.
Manag. 2009,15 (3), 273−285;.
105. Arksey, H.; O’Malley, L. Scoping Studies: towards a
Methodological Framework. Int. J. Soc. Res. Methodol. 2005,8(1),
19−32;.
106. Tricco, A. C.; Lillie, E.; Zarin, W.; O’Brien, K. K.; Colquhoun, H.;
Levac,D.;Moher,D.;Peters,M.D.J.;Horsley,T.;Weeks,L.;
Hempel, S.; Akl, E. A.; Chang, C.; McGowan, J.; Stewart, L.; Hartling,

22 —T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL
L.; Aldcroft, A.; Wilson, M. G.; Garritty, C.; Lewin, S.; Godfrey, C. M.;
Macdonald, M. T.; Langlois, E. V.; Soares-Weiser, K.; Moriarty, J.;
Clifford, T.; Tunçalp, Ö.; Straus, S. E. PRISMA Extension for
Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann.
Intern. Med. 2018,169 (7), 467−473;.
107. Munn, Z.; Peters, M. D. J.; Stern, C.; Tufanaru, C.; McArthur, A.;
Aromataris, E. Systematic Review or Scoping Review? Guidance
for Authors when Choosing between a Systematic or Scoping
Review Approach. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2018,18 (1), 143;
.
108. McHugh, M. L. Interrater Reliability: the Kappa Statistic. Biochem.
Med. 2012,22 (3), 276−282;.
109. Falagas, M. E.; Kouranos, V. D.; Arencibia-Jorge, R.;
Karageorgopoulos, D. E. Comparison of SCImago Journal Rank
Indicator with Journal Impact Factor. FASEB J. 2008,22 (8),
2623−2628;.
110. Gómez-Núñez, A. J.; Vargas-Quesada, B.; Chinchilla-Rodríguez, Z.;
Batagelj, V.; Moya-Anegón, F. Visualization and Analysis of
SCImago Journal & Country Rank Structure via Journal Clustering.
AJIM 2016,68 (5), 607−627;.
111. Walters, G.; Gill, C.; Le Pham, D. Q.; Filep, S. Virtual Tourism
Experiences and Mental Restoration. J. Hosp. Tour. Res. 2024,48
(3), 564−569;.
112. Bodet-Contentin, L.; Letourneur, M.; Ehrmann, S. Virtual Reality
during Work Breaks to Reduce Fatigue of Intensive Unit
Caregivers: A Crossover, Pilot, Randomised Trial. Aust. Crit. Care
2023,36 (3), 345−349;.
113. Lyons, K. D.; Slaughenhaupt, R. M.; Mupparaju, S. H.; Lim, J. S.;
Anderson, A. A.; Stankovic, A. S.; Cowan, D. R.; Fellows, A. M.;
Binsted, K. A.; Buckey, J. C. Autonomous Psychological Support for
Isolation and Confinement. Aerosp. Med. Hum. Perform. 2020,91
(11), 876−885;.
114. Klomp, R. W.; Jones, L.; Watanabe, E.; Thompson, W. W. CDC’s
Multiple Approaches to Safeguard the Health, Safety, and
Resilience of Ebola Responders. Prehosp. Disaster Med. 2020,35
(1), 69−75;.
115. Salamon, N.; Grimm, J. M.; Horack, J. M.; Newton, E. K. Application
of Virtual Reality for Crew Mental Health in Extended-Duration
Space Missions. Acta Astronaut. 2018,146, 117−122;.
116. Skorupska, K.; Grzeszczuk, M.; Jaskulska, A.; Kornacka, M.;
Pochwatko, G.; Kopeć, W. A Case for VR Briefings: Comparing
Communication in Daily Audio and VR Mission Control in a
Simulated Lunar Mission. In Digital Interaction and Machine
Intelligence, Bd 710; Biele, C.; Kacprzyk, J.; Kopeć, W.; Owsiński, J.
W.; Romanowski, A.; Sikorski, M., Eds.; Springer Nature:
Switzerland, Cham, 2023; pp. 287−297.
117. Pamidimukkala, A.; Kermanshachi, S. Virtual Reality Training for
Geological and Mining Workers to Prevent Powered Haulage
Accidents. In International Conference on Transportation and
Development 2023; Wei, H., Ed.; American Society of Civil
Engineers: Reston, VA, 2023; pp. 728−736.
118. Jacobsen, E. L.; Solberg, A.; Golovina, O.; Teizer, J. Active
Personalized Construction Safety Training Using Run-Time Data
Collection in Physical and Virtual Reality Work Environments. CI
2022,22 (3), 531−553;.
119. Strzałkowski, P.; Bęś, P.; Szóstak, M.; Napiórkowski, M. Application
of Virtual Reality (VR) Technology in Mining and Civil Engineering.
Sustainability 2024,16 (6), 2239;
.
120. Innocenti, A.; Molinari, F.; Muller, C. Assessing Risk Perception
and Well-Being at Workplaces: A Game Based Approach. In 2012
18th International ICE Conference on Engineering, Technology and
Innovation; IEEE, 2012; pp. 1−8.
121. Simonetto, M.; Arena, S.; Peron, M. A Methodological Framework
to Integrate Motion Capture System and Virtual Reality for
Assembly System 4.0 Workplace Design. Saf. Sci. 2022,146,
105561; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105561.
122. Carnazzo, C.; Spada, S.; Lamacchia, S.; Manuri, F.; Sanna, A.;
Cavatorta, M. P. Virtual Reality in Ergonomics by Wearable
Devices: Experiences from the Automotive Sector. JWL 2024,36,
621−635;.
123. Latini, A.; Di Giuseppe, E.; D’Orazio, M.; Di Perna, C. Exploring the
Use of Immersive Virtual Reality to Assess Occupants’ Productivity
and Comfort in Workplaces: An Experimental Study on the Role of
Walls Colour. Energy Build. 2021,253, 111508; https://doi.org/10
.1016/j.enbuild.2021.111508.
124. Kiluk, A.; Paneva, V.; Seinfeld, S.; Müller, J. The Impact of Different
Virtual Work Environments on Flow, Performance, User Emotions,
and Preferences. arXiv 2023..
125. Macchi, G.; de Pisapia, N. Virtual Reality, Face-To-Face, and 2D
Video Conferencing Differently Impact Fatigue, Creativity, Flow,
and Decision-Making in Workplace Dynamics. Sci. Rep. 2024,14
(1), 10260; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-60942-6.
126. van der Wijst, P. J.; Hong, A. P. C. I.; Damen, D. J. Context and
Environment in Negotiation. In Handbook of Group Decision and
Negotiation; Kilgour, D. M.; Eden, C., Eds.; Springer International
Publishing: Cham, 2020; pp. 1−24.
127. Pereira, A. C.; Alves, A. C.; Arezes, P. Augmented Reality in a Lean
Workplace at Smart Factories: A Case Study. Appl. Sci. 2023,13
(16), 9120;
.
128. Rinnert, T.; Walsh, J.; Fleury, C.; Coppin, G.; Duval, T.; Thomas, B.
H. AR Presentation of Team Members’ Performance and Inner
Status to Their Leader: A Comparative Study. Appl. Sci. 2024,14 (1),
123;
.
129. Gerdenitsch, C.; Meneweger, T.; Stockreiter, C.; Butterer, P.;
Halbwachs, M.; Scheiblhofer, D. Experiencing an
Augmented-Reality Assisted Assembly Task Autonomy, Passive
Work Attitude, and Responsibility. J. Corp. Real Estate 2022,2022
(24), 59−72.
130. Li, C. H. J.; Liang, V.; Chow, Y. T. H.; Ng, H.-Y.; Li, S.-P. A Mixed
Reality-Based Platform towards Human-Cyber-Physical Systems
with IoT Wearable Device for Occupational Safety and Health
Training. Appl. Sci. 2022,12 (23), 12009; https://doi.org/10.3390/
app122312009.
131. Rauh, S. F.; Koller, M.; Schäfer, P.; Meixner, G.; Bogdan, C.; Viberg,
O. MR On-SeT: A Mixed Reality Occupational Health and Safety
Training for World-wide Distribution. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn.
2021,16 (05), 163;
.
132. Riches, S.; Taylor, L.; Jeyarajaguru, P.; Veling, W.; Valmaggia, L.
Virtual Reality and Immersive Technologies to Promote
Workplace Wellbeing: a Systematic Review. J. Ment. Health 2024,
33 (2), 253−273;.
133. Weiß, S.; Heuten, W. Don’t Panic! −Influence of Virtual Stressor
Representations from the ICU Context on Perceived Stress Levels.
In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems; Schmidt, A.; Väänänen, K.; Goyal, T.;
Kristensson, P. O.; Peters, A.; Mueller, S.; Williamson, J. R.; Wilson,
M. L., Eds.; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2023; pp. 1−15.
134. Wu, P.; Morie, J.; Benton, J.; Haynes, K.; Chance, E.; Ott, T.;
Schmer-Galunder, S. Social Maintenance and Psychological

T. Paetow et al.: Towards future of work in immersive environments and its impact on the QWL —23
Support Using Virtual Worlds. In Social Computing,
Behavioral-Cultural Modeling and Prediction, Bd 8393;Hutchison,D.;
Kanade, T.; Kittler, J.; Kleinberg, J. M.; Mattern, F.; Mitchell, J. C.;
Naor, M.; Nierstrasz, O.; Pandu Rangan, C.; Steffen, B.; Sudan, M.;
Terzopoulos, D.; Tygar, D.; Vardi, M. Y.; Weikum, G.; Kennedy, W.
G.; Agarwal, N.; Yang, S. J., Eds.; Springer International
Publishing: Cham, S, 2014; pp. 393−402.
135. Wu, P.; Morie, J.; Wall, P.; Chance, E.; Haynes, K.; Ladwig, J.; Bell,
B.; Ott, T.; Miller, C. Maintaining Psycho-Social Health on the Way
to Mars and Back. In Proceedings of the 2015 Virtual Reality
International Conference; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2015;
pp. 1−7.
136. Mehra, R.; Sharma, V. S.; Kaulgud, V.; Podder, S.; Burden, A. P.
Immersive IDE: Towards Leveraging Virtual Reality for Creating an
Immersive Software Development Environment. In Proceedings of
the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering
Workshops; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 177−180.
137. Al Harthy, B.; Al Harthi, A.; Arianpoor, A.; Zaidan, A. S. Impact of
Metaverse at Workplace: Opportunity and Challenges. In Beyond
Reality: Navigating the Power of Metaverse and Its Applications, Bd
876; Al-Emran, M.; Ali, J. H.; Valeri, M.; Alnoor, A.; Hussien, Z. A.,
Eds.; Springer Nature: Switzerland, Cham, 2023; pp. 54−68.
138. Rozak, H. A.; Fachrunnisa, O.; Sugiharti, T.; Fitriati, I. R. Metaverse
and Modification Needs of Human Resources Management
Practices and Policies: An Overview. In Advances in Intelligent
Networking and Collaborative Systems, Bd 182; Barolli, L., Ed.;
Springer: Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2023; pp. 285−294.
139. Cousins, K. C.; Varshney, U. Designing Ubiquitous Computing
Environments to Support Work Life Balance. Commun. ACM 2009,
52 (5), 117−123;.