I walk, therefore I am: a multidimensional study on the influence of the locomotion method upon presence in virtual reality

[EN] A defining virtual reality (VR) metric is the sense of presence, a complex, multidimensional psychophysical construct that represents how intense is the sensation of actually being there, inside the virtual environment (VE), forgetting how technology mediates the experience. Our paper explores how locomotion influences presence, studying two different ways of artificial movement along the VE: walking-in-place (through head bobbing detection) and indirect walking (through touchpad). To evaluate that influence, a narrative-neutral maze was created, from where 41 participants (N=41) had to escape. Measuring presence is a controversial topic since there is not a single, objective measure but a wide range of metrics depending on the different theoretical basis. For this reason, we have used for the first time, representative metrics from all three traditional dimensions of presence: subjective presence (SP) (self-reported through questionnaires), behavioral presence (BP) (obtained from unconscious reactions while inside the VE), and physiological presence (PP) [usually measured using heart rate or electrodermal activity (EDA)]. SP was measured with the ITC-SOPI questionnaire, BP by collecting the participants' reactions, and PP by using a bracelet that registered EDA. The results show two main findings: (i) There is no correlation between the different presence metrics. This opens the door to a simpler way of measuring presence in an objective, reliable way. (ii) There is no significant difference between the two locomotion techniques for any of the three metrics, which shows that the authenticity of VR does not rely on how you move within the VE.Soler-Domínguez, JL.; Juan-Ripoll, CD.; Contero, M.; Alcañiz Raya, ML. (2020). I walk, therefore I am: a multidimensional study on the influence of the locomotion method upon presence in virtual reality. Journal of Computational Design and Engineering. 7(5):577-590. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcde/qwaa040S57759075Baños, R. M., Botella, C., Garcia-Palacios, A., Villa, H., Perpiña, C., & Alcañiz, M. (2000). Presence and Reality Judgment in Virtual Environments: A Unitary Construct? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3(3), 327-335. doi:10.1089/10949310050078760Biocca, F. (1992). Will Simulation Sickness Slow Down the Diffusion of Virtual Environment Technology? Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(3), 334-343. doi:10.1162/pres.1992.1.3.334Biocca, F., Harms, C., & Burgoon, J. K. (2003). Toward a More Robust Theory and Measure of Social Presence: Review and Suggested Criteria. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 12(5), 456-480. doi:10.1162/105474603322761270Boletsis, C. (2017). The New Era of Virtual Reality Locomotion: A Systematic Literature Review of Techniques and a Proposed Typology. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 1(4), 24. doi:10.3390/mti1040024Boletsis, C., & Cedergren, J. E. (2019). VR Locomotion in the New Era of Virtual Reality: An Empirical Comparison of Prevalent Techniques. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2019, 1-15. doi:10.1155/2019/7420781Bowman, D. A., Koller, D., & Hodges, L. F. (1998). A methodology for the evaluation of travel techniques for immersive virtual environments. Virtual Reality, 3(2), 120-131. doi:10.1007/bf01417673Bozgeyikli, E., Raij, A., Katkoori, S., & Dubey, R. (2016). Point & Teleport Locomotion Technique for Virtual Reality. Proceedings of the 2016 Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play. doi:10.1145/2967934.2968105Bozgeyikli, E., Raij, A., Katkoori, S., & Dubey, R. (2019). Locomotion in virtual reality for room scale tracked areas. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 122, 38-49. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.08.002BRESLOW, N. (1970). A generalized Kruskal-Wallis test for comparing K samples subject to unequal patterns of censorship. Biometrika, 57(3), 579-594. doi:10.1093/biomet/57.3.579Chertoff, D. B., Goldiez, B., & LaViola, J. J. (2010). Virtual Experience Test: A virtual environment evaluation questionnaire. 2010 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference (VR). doi:10.1109/vr.2010.5444804Cohen, J. (1992). Statistical Power Analysis. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1(3), 98-101. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.ep10768783Critchley, H. D. (2002). Review: Electrodermal Responses: What Happens in the Brain. The Neuroscientist, 8(2), 132-142. doi:10.1177/107385840200800209Hale, K. S., & Stanney, K. M. (Eds.). (2014). Handbook of Virtual Environments. doi:10.1201/b17360Larsson, P., Västfjäll, D., & Kleiner, M. (2001). The Actor-Observer Effect in Virtual Reality Presentations. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(2), 239-246. doi:10.1089/109493101300117929Lee, K. M. (2004). Presence, Explicated. Communication Theory, 14(1), 27-50. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00302.xLessiter, J., Freeman, J., Keogh, E., & Davidoff, J. (2001). A Cross-Media Presence Questionnaire: The ITC-Sense of Presence Inventory. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 10(3), 282-297. doi:10.1162/105474601300343612Lilliefors, H. W. (1967). On the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Normality with Mean and Variance Unknown. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 62(318), 399-402. doi:10.1080/01621459.1967.10482916Mantovani, G., & Riva, G. (1999). «Real» Presence: How Different Ontologies Generate Different Criteria for Presence, Telepresence, and Virtual Presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8(5), 540-550. doi:10.1162/105474699566459Meehan, M., Razzaque, S., Insko, B., Whitton, M., & Brooks, F. P. (2005). Review of Four Studies on the Use of Physiological Reaction as a Measure of Presence in StressfulVirtual Environments. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 30(3), 239-258. doi:10.1007/s10484-005-6381-3Peck, T. C., Fuchs, H., & Whitton, M. C. (2011). An evaluation of navigational ability comparing Redirected Free Exploration with Distractors to Walking-in-Place and joystick locomotio interfaces. 2011 IEEE Virtual Reality Conference. doi:10.1109/vr.2011.5759437Riva, G., Wiederhold, B. K., & Mantovani, F. (2019). Neuroscience of Virtual Reality: From Virtual Exposure to Embodied Medicine. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 22(1), 82-96. doi:10.1089/cyber.2017.29099.griSanchez-Vives, M. V., & Slater, M. (2005). From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(4), 332-339. doi:10.1038/nrn1651Sano, A., Picard, R. W., & Stickgold, R. (2014). Quantitative analysis of wrist electrodermal activity during sleep. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 94(3), 382-389. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2014.09.011Schloerb, D. W. (1995). A Quantitative Measure of Telepresence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 4(1), 64-80. doi:10.1162/pres.1995.4.1.64Schubert, T., Friedmann, F., & Regenbrecht, H. (2001). The Experience of Presence: Factor Analytic Insights. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 10(3), 266-281. doi:10.1162/105474601300343603Schuemie, M. J., van der Straaten, P., Krijn, M., & van der Mast, C. A. P. G. (2001). Research on Presence in Virtual Reality: A Survey. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(2), 183-201. doi:10.1089/109493101300117884Sheridan, T. B. (1992). Musings on Telepresence and Virtual Presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 1(1), 120-126. doi:10.1162/pres.1992.1.1.120Sheridan, T. B. (1996). Further Musings on the Psychophysics of Presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5(2), 241-246. doi:10.1162/pres.1996.5.2.241Slater, M. (2004). How Colorful Was Your Day? Why Questionnaires Cannot Assess Presence in Virtual Environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 13(4), 484-493. doi:10.1162/1054746041944849Slater, M., & Steed, A. (2000). A Virtual Presence Counter. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 9(5), 413-434. doi:10.1162/105474600566925Slater, M., & Usoh, M. (1993). Representations Systems, Perceptual Position, and Presence in Immersive Virtual Environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 2(3), 221-233. doi:10.1162/pres.1993.2.3.221SLATER, M., USOH, M., & STEED, A. (1994). STEPS AND LADDERS IN VIRTUAL REALITY. Virtual Reality Software and Technology. doi:10.1142/9789814350938_0005Slater, M., Steed, A., & Usoh, M. (1995). The Virtual Treadmill: A Naturalistic Metaphor for Navigation in Immersive Virtual Environments. Virtual Environments ’95, 135-148. doi:10.1007/978-3-7091-9433-1_12Slater, M., Usoh, M., & Steed, A. (1995). Taking steps. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 2(3), 201-219. doi:10.1145/210079.210084Slater, M., McCarthy, J., & Maringelli, F. (1998). The Influence of Body Movement on Subjective Presence in Virtual Environments. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40(3), 469-477. doi:10.1518/001872098779591368So, R. H. Y., Lo, W. T., & Ho, A. T. K. (2001). Effects of Navigation Speed on Motion Sickness Caused by an Immersive Virtual Environment. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 43(3), 452-461. doi:10.1518/001872001775898223Steuer, J. (1992). Defining Virtual Reality: Dimensions Determining Telepresence. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 73-93. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00812.xSullivan, G. M., & Feinn, R. (2012). Using Effect Size—or Why the P Value Is Not Enough. Journal of Graduate Medical Education, 4(3), 279-282. doi:10.4300/jgme-d-12-00156.1Takatalo, J., Nyman, G., & Laaksonen, L. (2008). Components of human experience in virtual environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(1), 1-15. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2006.11.003Usoh, M., Catena, E., Arman, S., & Slater, M. (2000). Using Presence Questionnaires in Reality. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 9(5), 497-503. doi:10.1162/105474600566989Welch, R. B., Blackmon, T. T., Liu, A., Mellers, B. A., & Stark, L. W. (1996). The Effects of Pictorial Realism, Delay of Visual Feedback, and Observer Interactivity on the Subjective Sense of Presence. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5(3), 263-273. doi:10.1162/pres.1996.5.3.263Witmer, B. G., Jerome, C. J., & Singer, M. J. (2005). The Factor Structure of the Presence Questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 14(3), 298-312. doi:10.1162/105474605323384654Zanbaka, C., Babu, S., Xiao, D., Ulinski, A., Hodges, L. F., & Lok, B. (s. f.). Effects of travel technique on cognition in virtual environments. IEEE Virtual Reality 2004. doi:10.1109/vr.2004.131006

Control of virtual environments for young people with learning difficulties

Purpose: The objective of this research is to identify the requirements for the selection or development of usable virtual environment (VE) interface devices for young people with learning disabilities. Method: a user-centred design methodology was employed, to produce a design specification for usable VE interface devices. Details of the users' cognitive, physical and perceptual abilities were obtained through observation and normative assessment tests. Conclusions : A review of computer interface technology, including virtual reality and assistive devices, was conducted. As there were no devices identified that met all the requirements of the design specification, it was concluded that there is a need for the design and development of new concepts. Future research will involve concept and prototype development and user-based evaluation of the prototypes

Visualising mixed reality simulation for multiple users

Cowling, MA ORCiD: 0000-0003-1444-1563Blended reality seeks to encourage co-presence in the classroom, blending student experience across virtual and physical worlds. In a similar way, Mixed Reality, a continuum between virtual and real environments, is now allowing learners to work in both the physical and the digital world simultaneously, especially when combined with an immersive headset experience. This experience provides innovative new experiences for learning, but faces the challenge that most of these experiences are single user, leaving others outside the new environment. The question therefore becomes, how can a mixed reality simulation be experienced by multiple users, and how can we present that simulation effectively to users to create a true blended reality environment? This paper proposes a study that uses existing screen production research into the user and spectator to produce a mixed reality simulation suitable for multiple users. A research method using Design Based Research is also presented to assess the usability of the approach

Virtual reality in theatre education and design practice - new developments and applications

The global use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) has already established new approaches to theatre education and research, shifting traditional methods of knowledge delivery towards a more visually enhanced experience, which is especially important for teaching scenography. In this paper, I examine the role of multimedia within the field of theatre studies, with particular focus on the theory and practice of theatre design and education. I discuss various IT applications that have transformed the way we experience, learn and co-create our cultural heritage. I explore a suite of rapidly developing communication and computer-visualization techniques that enable reciprocal exchange between students, theatre performances and artefacts. Eventually, I analyse novel technology-mediated teaching techniques that attempt to provide a new media platform for visually enhanced information transfer. My findings indicate that the recent developments in the personalization of knowledge delivery, and also in student-centred study and e-learning, necessitate the transformation of the learners from passive consumers of digital products to active and creative participants in the learning experience

A Content-Analysis Approach for Exploring Usability Problems in a Collaborative Virtual Environment

As Virtual Reality (VR) products are becoming more widely available in the consumer market, improving the usability of these devices and environments is crucial. In this paper, we are going to introduce a framework for the usability evaluation of collaborative 3D virtual environments based on a large-scale usability study of a mixedmodality collaborative VR system. We first review previous literature about important usability issues related to collaborative 3D virtual environments, supplemented with our research in which we conducted 122 interviews after participants solved a collaborative virtual reality task. Then, building on the literature review and our results, we extend previous usability frameworks. We identified twelve different usability problems, and based on the causes of the problems, we grouped them into three main categories: VR environment-, device interaction-, and task-specific problems. The framework can be used to guide the usability evaluation of collaborative VR environments

Eco Global Evaluation: Cross Benefits of Economic and Ecological Evaluation

This paper highlights the complementarities of cost and environmental evaluation in a sustainable approach. Starting with the needs and limits for whole product lifecycle evaluation, this paper begins with the modeling, data capture and performance indicator aspects. In a second step, the information issue, regarding the whole lifecycle of the product is addressed. In order to go further than the economical evaluations/assessment, the value concept (for a product or a service) is discussed. Value could combine functional requirements, cost objectives and environmental impact. Finally, knowledge issues which address the complexity of integrating multi-disciplinary expertise to the whole lifecycle of a product are discussing.EcoSD NetworkEcoSD networ

Exploring individual user differences in the 2D/3D interaction with medical image data

User-centered design is often performed without regard to individual user differences. In this paper, we report results of an empirical study aimed to evaluate whether computer experience and demographic user characteristics would have an effect on the way people interact with the visualized medical data in a 3D virtual environment using 2D and 3D input devices. We analyzed the interaction through performance data, questionnaires and observations. The results suggest that differences in gender, age and game experience have an effect on people’s behavior and task performance, as well as on subjective\ud user preferences