Purpose Remote Virtual Reality research using Head-Mounted Displays (HMD-VR) offers new opportunities for data collection outside supervised laboratory settings, but practical challenges related to recruitment and implementation may limit its uptake. The purpose of this paper is to address this gap through reporting of recruitment feasibility, acceptance and acceptability from two previously published remote HMD-VR studies conducted in clinical and nonclinical populations. Design/methodology/approach In Study 1, participants with and without depression were sent HMDs by post. In Study 2, participants owned their own HMDs. Recruitment feasibility was examined by rates of recruitment, conversion (proportion of eligible participants who enrolled), retention and follow-up rates. Acceptance was indexed by adverse effects, and acceptability was assessed using participant ratings and feedback. Findings Both studies demonstrated feasible and acceptable recruitment for remote HMD-VR research. In Study 1, 149 participants with depression and 57 controls were contacted with 98 and 40 taking part (67.7% and 74.1% conversion). Retention rates were high (92.5% and 90.5%), with follow-up attrition not exceeding 18.4%. In Study 2, 124 participants were sent materials, with 85.5% conversion and 59.4% retention. Across both studies, participants reported ease of use and minimal adverse effects. Practical implications The authors describe recruitment procedures and associated resources, including time, workload and monetary costs, and outline platforms and recruitment strategies relevant for remote HMD-VR studies. Originality/value This paper provides empirical evidence of recruitment feasibility and participant acceptability in remote HMD-VR research across clinical and non-clinical samples, addressing a methodological area that remains underreported in the literature.
Clements et al. (Wed,) studied this question.