The augmented reality educational tool for learning 2D and 3D space content in primary school

Space is a Mathematics topic for the second level in Kurikulum Standard Sekolah Rendah (KSSR) syllabus that is difficult for primary school pupils to understand because it requires them to visualize the 3-dimensional shapes and 2-dimensional polygons in solving Mathematical questions. Therefore, Augmented Reality (AR) is proposed due to its potential as it allows pupils to visualize the 3-dimensional and 2- dimensional shapes practically. The objective of this research is to develop an effective AR educational tool based on User Experience (UX) and the identified needs for primary school pupils to visualize 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional shapes in learning Mathematics on Space topic. ASSURE instructional design model and quantitative approach have been used in this research. The quantitative approach focused on analysing users⁵ needs for the AR educational tool that has been developed and analysing its effectiveness. It involved surweys on the users' needs and the effectiveness of the AR educational tool. This AR educational tool was developed following Waterfall Methodology and its effectiveness was evaluated using ISO/IEC 25022. All data were analysed to find the mean and were used to determine the users' needs for the development of the AR educational tool. The findings of the research include a list of user needs, a successfully developed AR educational tool based on the UX, and users' needs obtained. The high mean of effectiveness test shows that the users were satisfied with the AR educational tool that had been developed. This research is very important as an effort to increase pupils9 understanding of space topic and assist primary school teachers to implement teaching sessions more effectively

Virtual objects in electronic catalogs: A human-computer interface issue

Web interface design is an important aspect of electronic commerce (EC). However, apart from design frameworks and guidelines for Web-based EC, not much has been done by researchers or practitioners on how electronic catalogs (e-catalogs) influence the users' desirability and satisfaction as purchasers. In this correspondence, we investigate the form of media that represented the most efficient mode to present products to Web users by summarizing and evaluating various existing forms of e-catalogs and their respective responses from Web users. We conclude that a 3-D virtual object (VO) is the most efficient mode of electronic cataloging for Web interface due to a better sense of presence of users, a more attractive and enjoyable media of delivery of useful information to users, and a higher level of engagement of user's memory. A 3-D VO, as a result, generates the highest users' satisfaction, which leads to increased propensity to purchase. Further, we discuss the practical and theoretical research implications of these findings to e-catalogs. © 2007 IEEE.published_or_final_versio

Nouvelles approches pour une exploitation efficace des comportements et interactions de l'humain dans l'environnement virtuel

La création des moyens permettant à l’humain de se retrouver dans un endroit différent du monde réel n’est pas une nouveauté. Les outils comme les peintures ou les livres permettent tout autant de transporter l’humain par imagination dans un monde fictif afin de lui permettre de s’évader de la vie réelle. C’est également ce que permettent les technologies de la réalité virtuelle. Cependant, les environnements de la réalité virtuelle sont des représentations 3D numériques exploitables à l’échelle humaine. Ils peuvent stimuler au maximum les habiletés perceptives de l’humain à travers ses canaux sensoriels, tout en lui permettant d’influencer activement le déroulement des évènements qui y ont lieu. De ce fait, ils représentent un atout majeur pour la représentation de l’information à des fins diverses. Dans cette thèse, nous nous sommes intéressés à l’exploitation de la réalité virtuelle dans le cadre de la thérapie par exposition pour le traitement du trouble de stress post-traumatique. En faisant une revue de littérature dans ce domaine, nous avons constaté le rôle essentiellement passif qui est attribué au patient. En effet, les études antérieures se sont focalisées sur la composante « modélisation 3D » de la réalité virtuelle ainsi que sur la stimulation sensorielle, avec pour but principal d’aider le patient à narrer son trauma. Cela est fait au détriment d’une des caractéristiques principales de la réalité virtuelle qu’est l’interaction du sujet avec l’environnement virtuel. Ainsi, au vu des avantages qu’elles offrent, nous pensons que les technologies de la réalité virtuelle devraient être utilisées pour permettre au patient de revivre son trauma différemment au moyen de l’interaction. Alors, nous avons proposé des approches basées sur le modèle de référence de la réalité virtuelle. Ces approches exploitent les techniques de gamification avancées des jeux sérieux ajoutées à la technique d’ajustement dynamique de la difficulté empruntée au domaine du jeu vidéo, pour implémenter les interactions naturelles de l’humain avec l’environnement virtuel. Nous avons appliqué ces approches à un simulateur de conduite de camion en réalité virtuelle pour traiter les camionneurs souffrant de trouble de stress post-traumatique. Les résultats d’évaluation d’utilisabilité du simulateur conformément à ces approches y sont présentés : le sentiment de présence a été atteint à travers cet outil et les participants ont trouvé la qualité des interactions avec l’environnement virtuel optimale. En perspectives, nous avons décrit l’application clinique expérimentale qui sera effectuée avec des patients en résidence à « La Futaie », centre de thérapie avec lequel nous avons collaboré tout au long de cette recherche. Creating the means for humans to find themselves in a place different from the real world is nothing new. Tools such as paintings or books also allow humans to be transported by imagination into a fictitious world in order to escape from real life. This is also what virtual reality technologies allow. However, virtual reality environments are digital 3D environments usable on a human scale. They can maximize the perceptual skills of humans through their sensory channels while allowing them to actively influence the course of events that take place in these environments. Therefore, they are a major asset for the representation of information for various purposes. In this thesis, we focused on the use of virtual reality as part of exposure therapy for the treatment of post-traumatic stress disorder. By reviewing the literature in that area, we noted the essentially passive role attributed to the patient. Indeed, previous studies have focused on the "3D modeling" component of virtual reality as well as on sensory stimulation, with the main goal of helping the patient to narrate his trauma. That is done to the detriment of one of the main characteristics of virtual reality, which is the subject's interaction with the virtual world. So, given the benefits they offer, we believe that virtual reality technologies should be used to allow the patient to relive his trauma differently through interaction. So, we have proposed approaches based on the virtual reality reference model. These approaches exploit the advanced gamification techniques of serious games combined with the dynamic difficulty adjustment technique borrowed from the field of video games, to implement the natural interactions of humans with the virtual environment. We applied these approaches to a virtual reality truck driving simulator to treat truckers with post-traumatic stress disorder. The simulator usability evaluation results in accordance with these approaches are presented: the feeling of presence was achieved through this tool and the participants found the quality of interactions with the virtual world to be optimal. In perspective, we have described the experimental clinical application that will be carried out with patients in residence at "La Futaie", the therapy center with which we have collaborated throughout this research

Usability evaluation of non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments

This study is about the evaluation of non-immersive desktop web-based photo-realistic virtual environments using think-aloud protocol and heuristic evaluation to determine three aims: (1) whether applying the same usability evaluation methodologies result in additional usability guideline categoriesidentified from the Koykka, Ollikainen, Ranta-aho, Milszus, Wasserroth and Friedrich 1999 study; (2) whether think-aloud protocol or usability heuristic evaluation is a better evaluation method for identifying usability problems in desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments; and (3) whether large-scale desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments will have more usability problems than small-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. The results show that using the Emergent Theme Analysis (ETA), four broad themes were derived: functionality, interaction, appearance and user comments with functionality and interaction broad themes being similar to the categories suggested by Koykka et al. (1999). Furthermore, the results indicate that small-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments had more usability problems than large-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments, contrary to the hypothesis that large-scale VEs will have more usability problems due to its complexity and that the think-aloud protocol derived more themes compared to the heuristic evaluation – suggesting that TAP is a better usability evaluation method than HE in this type of study. However, a combination of the two qualitative methods has identified a greater number of usability problems, supporting the need for triangulation of research methods. The investigation resulted in new design guidelines that will allow for more usable design of non-immersive desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. Furthermore, the study provides some new areas for future developments of usability evaluation methods for non-immersive desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments.PublishedNon Peer ReviewedAxup, J. 2002, Comparison of Usability Evaluation Methods (UEM), Published on-line at Date Accessed UserDesign.com. Bowman, D. A. 2002, 'Principles for the design of performance-oriented interaction techniques', . Bowman, D. A. & L. F. Hodges (1997) An Evaluation of Techniques for Grabbing and Manipulating Remote Objects in Immersive Virtual Environments. 1997 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, April 1997 pp. 35 - ff. Bowman, D. A., D. B. Johnson & L. F. Hodges (1999) Evaluation of Virtual Environment Interaction Techniques. VRST'99: ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, University College, London, December 20-22, 1999 pp. 26-33. Chen, J.-L. (2000) A model of wayfinding in virtual environments: Strategies for navigational aids. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 60:11-B, pp. 5701, US: Univ Microfilms International. Dalgarno, B. & J. Scott (1999) Usability Problems in Desktop Virtual Environments. OZCHI'99 Interfaces for the Global Community, Charles Sturt, Wagga Wagga, Australia, pp. 134 - 136. Darken, R. P. & J. L. Sibert (1996) Wayfinding Strategies and Behaviours in Large Virtual Environments. Computer-Human Interaction (CHI), . Goldbaum, H. 2003, The Virtual Wroxton Abbey, Published on-line at Date Accessed Oxfordshire, England, Wroxton College. Johnson, C. 1998, On the Problems of Validating DesktopVR Innovative User Interfaces: Multimedia and Multimodal User Interfaces, Wearable Computers and Virtual Reality, Published on-line at Date Accessed Proceedings of the HCI'98 Conference on People and Computers XIII. Koykka, M., R. Ollikainen, M. Ranta-aho, W. Milszus, S. Wasserroth & M. Friedrich (1999) Usability Heuristic Guidelines for 3D Multi-User Worlds. Interfaces for the Global Community, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia, pp. 52 - 57. Molich, R. & J. Nielsen (1990) Improving a Human-Computer Dialogue. Communications of ACM, 33:3, pp. 338- 348. Nielsen, J. (1994) Usability Inspection Methods. CHI'94, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, April 24-28, 1994 pp. 413-414. Nielsen, J. 1997, 'Usability Testing', in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Ed G. Salvendy, John Wiley and Sons, pp. 1543-1568. RichardStrauss 2003, The Villa in Garmisch, Published on-line at Date Accessed Garmisch, Bavaria, Richar Strauus. Sandra, L. 2002, Task Analysis, pp 1-6. Saretto, C. J. (1997) A Survey of Interaction Issues Facing Navigation in Virtual Worlds. CHI 97: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Los Angeles, USA, April 18-23, 1997 pp. 1-7. Stanney, K. M., M. Mollaghasemi, L. Reeves, R. Breaux & D. A. Graeber (2003) Usability engineering of virtual environments (VEs): identifying multiple criteria that drive effective VE system design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58:4, pp. 447-481. Sutcliffe, A. & K. Deol Kaur 2000, Evaluating the Usability of Virtual Reality User Interfaces, Published online at Date Accessed Behaviour and Information Technology. Vinson, N. G. (1999) Design Guidelines for Landmark to Support Navigation in Virtual Environments. CHI'99: The CHI is the Limit ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, PA USA, May 15 - 20, 1999 pp. 278-285. Zhang, Z. W. 2003, Usability Evaluation Methods, Published on-line at Date Accessed Drexel University

Usability evaluation of non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments

This study is about the evaluation of non-immersive desktop web-based photo-realistic virtual environments using think-aloud protocol and heuristic evaluation to determine three aims: (1) whether applying the same usability evaluation methodologies result in additional usability guideline categoriesidentified from the Koykka, Ollikainen, Ranta-aho, Milszus, Wasserroth and Friedrich 1999 study; (2) whether think-aloud protocol or usability heuristic evaluation is a better evaluation method for identifying usability problems in desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments; and (3) whether large-scale desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments will have more usability problems than small-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. The results show that using the Emergent Theme Analysis (ETA), four broad themes were derived: functionality, interaction, appearance and user comments with functionality and interaction broad themes being similar to the categories suggested by Koykka et al. (1999). Furthermore, the results indicate that small-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments had more usability problems than large-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments, contrary to the hypothesis that large-scale VEs will have more usability problems due to its complexity and that the think-aloud protocol derived more themes compared to the heuristic evaluation – suggesting that TAP is a better usability evaluation method than HE in this type of study. However, a combination of the two qualitative methods has identified a greater number of usability problems, supporting the need for triangulation of research methods. The investigation resulted in new design guidelines that will allow for more usable design of non-immersive desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. Furthermore, the study provides some new areas for future developments of usability evaluation methods for non-immersive desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments.PublishedNon Peer ReviewedAxup, J. 2002, Comparison of Usability Evaluation Methods (UEM), Published on-line at Date Accessed UserDesign.com. Bowman, D. A. 2002, 'Principles for the design of performance-oriented interaction techniques', . Bowman, D. A. & L. F. Hodges (1997) An Evaluation of Techniques for Grabbing and Manipulating Remote Objects in Immersive Virtual Environments. 1997 Symposium on Interactive 3D Graphics, April 1997 pp. 35 - ff. Bowman, D. A., D. B. Johnson & L. F. Hodges (1999) Evaluation of Virtual Environment Interaction Techniques. VRST'99: ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, University College, London, December 20-22, 1999 pp. 26-33. Chen, J.-L. (2000) A model of wayfinding in virtual environments: Strategies for navigational aids. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 60:11-B, pp. 5701, US: Univ Microfilms International. Dalgarno, B. & J. Scott (1999) Usability Problems in Desktop Virtual Environments. OZCHI'99 Interfaces for the Global Community, Charles Sturt, Wagga Wagga, Australia, pp. 134 - 136. Darken, R. P. & J. L. Sibert (1996) Wayfinding Strategies and Behaviours in Large Virtual Environments. Computer-Human Interaction (CHI), . Goldbaum, H. 2003, The Virtual Wroxton Abbey, Published on-line at Date Accessed Oxfordshire, England, Wroxton College. Johnson, C. 1998, On the Problems of Validating DesktopVR Innovative User Interfaces: Multimedia and Multimodal User Interfaces, Wearable Computers and Virtual Reality, Published on-line at Date Accessed Proceedings of the HCI'98 Conference on People and Computers XIII. Koykka, M., R. Ollikainen, M. Ranta-aho, W. Milszus, S. Wasserroth & M. Friedrich (1999) Usability Heuristic Guidelines for 3D Multi-User Worlds. Interfaces for the Global Community, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia, pp. 52 - 57. Molich, R. & J. Nielsen (1990) Improving a Human-Computer Dialogue. Communications of ACM, 33:3, pp. 338- 348. Nielsen, J. (1994) Usability Inspection Methods. CHI'94, Boston, Massachusetts, USA, April 24-28, 1994 pp. 413-414. Nielsen, J. 1997, 'Usability Testing', in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, Ed G. Salvendy, John Wiley and Sons, pp. 1543-1568. RichardStrauss 2003, The Villa in Garmisch, Published on-line at Date Accessed Garmisch, Bavaria, Richar Strauus. Sandra, L. 2002, Task Analysis, pp 1-6. Saretto, C. J. (1997) A Survey of Interaction Issues Facing Navigation in Virtual Worlds. CHI 97: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Los Angeles, USA, April 18-23, 1997 pp. 1-7. Stanney, K. M., M. Mollaghasemi, L. Reeves, R. Breaux & D. A. Graeber (2003) Usability engineering of virtual environments (VEs): identifying multiple criteria that drive effective VE system design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58:4, pp. 447-481. Sutcliffe, A. & K. Deol Kaur 2000, Evaluating the Usability of Virtual Reality User Interfaces, Published online at Date Accessed Behaviour and Information Technology. Vinson, N. G. (1999) Design Guidelines for Landmark to Support Navigation in Virtual Environments. CHI'99: The CHI is the Limit ACM SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Pittsburgh, PA USA, May 15 - 20, 1999 pp. 278-285. Zhang, Z. W. 2003, Usability Evaluation Methods, Published on-line at Date Accessed Drexel University

Evaluation of virtual environments.

xi, 214 leaves :col. ill. ; 30 cm. Includes bibliographical references. University of Otago department: Information Science. "22 July 2004".The concept of Virtual Reality (VR), a three-dimensional, computer-generated environment that allows for a single or multiple users to interact, navigate, respond, and experience a synthesized world modelled from the real world, has provided social, scientific, economic and technological change since its inception in the early 1960's. Since that time, VR has also evolved into many forms and taken different tangents. One form that it has taken is non-immersive desktop photo-realistic Virtual Environments (VEs), where real-world still images are joined together to create 360 degree panoramas of places and objects in time. The concept has become increasingly popular since its creation using Apple QuickTime Virtual Reality Authoring Studio (QTVRAS) in 1995. This study is about the evaluation of non-immersive desktop web-based photo-realistic virtual environments using a previously applied evaluation method for non-immersive desktop 3D multi-user environments conducted by Koykka, Ollikainen, Ranta-aho, Milszus, Wasserroth and Friedrich (1999). The two qualitative evaluation methods are think-aloud protocol analysis and heuristic evaluation. There are three aims in this study: (1 ) to determine whether applying the same usability evaluation methodologies result in additional usability guideline categories: 3D environments should provide support for orientation, navigation and movement, real world metaphors need to be clearly understandable and avoidance of delay and waiting periods in performance (identified from the Koykka et at. study); (2) to determine whether think-aloud protocol or usability heuristic evaluation is a better evaluation method, for identifying usability problems in desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments; and (3) to determine whether large-scale desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments will have more usability problems than small-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. It is hoped that by investigating these aims that design guidelines for desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments may be derived. Twelve subjects took part in evaluating two different web-based photo-realistic VEs using the Think-Aloud Protocol (TAP) and Jakob Nielsen's usability Heuristic Evaluation (HE). The think-aloud protocols were videotaped and the heuristic evaluation results were word-processed. A variation of the grounded theory research method called Emergent Themes Analysis (ETA) was used to "distil" the recorded narratives into broad themes. The results show that ETA derived four broad themes: functionality, interaction, appearance and user comments. Within each broad theme, sub-themes were also derived to produce possible design guidelines for desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. The results also show that the functionality and interaction broad themes were similar to the categories suggested by Koykka et al. (1999). Furthermore, the results indicate that small-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments had more usability problems than large-scale non-immersive, desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments, contrary to the hypothesis that large-scale VEs will have more usability problems due to its complexity. Using the ETA method to analyze the data, the think-aloud protocol derived more themes compared to the heuristic evaluation – suggesting that TAP is a better usability evaluation method than HE in this type of study. However, a combination of the two qualitative methods has identified a greater number of usability problems, supporting the need for triangulation of research methods. It is hoped that these new design guidelines will allow for more usable design of non-immersive desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. Furthermore, it is hoped that this study provides a beginning of future developments of usability evaluation methods for non-immersive desktop, photo-realistic virtual environments. Regardless of its future use, usability evaluations of any virtual environments are still needed.UnpublishedResearch and Thesis writing: Research models and methods Learning Resource Centre © Learning Development, University of Wollongong, (2001), Accessed on January 18, 2004, http://www.uow.edu.au/research/files/Thesisl.pdf. Evans & Sutherland 'Visual Systems Solutions for Army Simulation and Training About.com, (2003), Accessed on October 15, 2003, http://www.es.com/. World's first interactive operation in hospital carpark (2003). The Press. Christchurch, INL Newspapers. 2003. The Systems Development Lifecycle School-Resource.co.uk, (2004), Accessed on December 12, 2003, http://www.sehoolresources.co.uk/systems development lifecycle.htm. Autoweb.com.au, AutoWeb Pty Limited & Web Publications Pty Ltd, (2002) Peugeot Tests Virtual Reality Design Centre, Accessed on September 3, 2003, http://www.autoweb.com.au/start_/showall_/id_PEU/docpeu0204261/cms/news/newsarticle.html. Axup, J., UserDesign.com, (2002) Comparison of Usability Evaluation Methods (UEM), Accessed on January 9, 2004, 2004, http://www.userdesign.com/usability_uern.html. Backlund, A. (2003). What Makes Information Systems Complex in the Eyes of Systems Analysts? Promote IT 2002: The Second Annual Knowledge Foundation Conference for the Promotion of Research in IT at New Universities and University Colleges in Sweden, Sweden. Bailey, R. W. (1996). Human Performance Engineering: Designing High Quality Professional User Interfaces for Computer Products, Applications and Systems. New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Beekman, G. (2001). Computer Confluence: Exploring Tomorrow's Technology. New Jersey, Prentice Hall. Biocca, F. and B. Delaney (1995). Immersive Virtual Reality Technology. Communication in the age of Virtual Reality. F. Biocca and M. R. Levy. New Jersey, U.S.A, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: 57-124. Bowman, D. A. ()999). Interaction techniques for common tasks in immersive virtual environments: Design evaluation and application. Georgia, Georgia University of Technology. Bowman, D. A. (2002). Principles for the design of performance-oriented interaction techniques. Bowman, D. A., D. B. Johnson, etal. (1999). Evaluation of Virtual Environment interaction Techniques. VRST'99: ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, University College, London, ACM Digital. Boza, W., (2002) Virtual Reality, Accessed on November 7, 2002, http://www_rcf.usc.edu/~wdutton/comm533/VRBoza.htm. Branigan, C., eSchool News Alert, (2002) Students to design virtual-reality games, Accessed on November 6, 2002, http://www.eschoolnews.com/news/Alerfunreg.cfm?ArticleID=4042&u1=%2Fnews% 2FshowStory%2Ecfm%3FArticleID%3D4042. Brooks Jr, F. P. (1999). "What's Real About Virtual Reality?" IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications(November/December): 16-27. Bullinger, H. J. (1997). Virtual Environments. Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. G. Salvendy, John Wiley and Sons: 1735-1757. Chapman, N. and j. Chapman (2000). Sound. Digital Multimedia. West Sussex, England, John Wiley & Sons: 376-383. Chazman, K. (2000). Grounded Theory. Handbook of Qualitative Research. N. Denzin, K. and Y. S. Lincoln. U.S.A, Sage Publications Inc: p509 - 535. Chen, S. E. (1995). "QuickTime VR - An Image-Based Approach to Virtual Environment Navigation." (SIGGRAPH): 29-38. Chorafas, D. N. and H. Steinman (1995). Virtual Reality: Practical Applications in Business and Industry. New Jersey, Prentice Hall PTR. Ciufo, C. (2000). "Modern Military Embraces Augmented Reality Displays." COTS Journal(May/June): 1|5-27. Clark, S. A., B. L. W. Wong, et al. (2000). QTVR: Support for Teaching Operative Procedures in Dentistry. People and Computers XIV: Usability or Else: Proceedings on Human-Computer Interaction HCI 2000, University of Sunderland, UK, London, Springer-Verlag. Cockburn, A. (2003). Research Methods in Information Systems Research:"Matching method to researcher". Humans and Technology incorporated. Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. CompArt Multimedia, BBC Education, (1995-2003) Pisa- Catherdral Square, Accessed on April 26, 2003, http://ww2.webcomp.com/virtuale/us/pisa/miracoli.htm. Cooper, M. and I. Benjamin (1995). Virtual Tourism: a realistic assessment of virtual reality for the tourist industry. Information and Communication Technologies in Tourism: Proceedings of ENTER 95, Innsbruck, Austria, Springer-Verlag, Vienne. Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research Design: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Thousand Oaks, California. Cruz-Neira, C., D. Sandin, et al., University of Ilinois, (2001) The CAVE Virtual Reality System, Accessed on April 25, 2003, http://www.evl.uic.edu/pape/CAVE/. Cyanworlds.inc, Cyanworlds.inc, (2003), Accessed on September 2, 2003, http://uru.ubi.com/us/screenshots.php. Dalgarno, B. and J. Scott (1999). Usability Problems in Desktop Virtual Environments. OZCHI'99 Interfaces for the Global Community, Charles Sturt, Wagga agga, Australia, School of Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, Barooma. Street, Wagga Wagga, NSW, Australia. Darken, R. P. and J. L. Sibert (1996). Wayfinding Strategies and Behaviours in Large Virtual Environments. ACM SIGHCHI 96, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, ACM. Dede, C., M. Salzman, et al. (2000). The design of immersive virtual learning environments: Fostering deep understandings of complex scientific knowledge. Denzin, N., K. and Y. S. Lincoln (2000). Handbook of Qualitative Research. U.S.A, Sage Publications Inc. Denzin, N., K. and Y. S. Lincoln (2000). Introduction: The Discipline and Practice of Qualitative Research. Handbook of Qualitative Research. N. Denzin, K. and Y. S. Lincoln. U.S.A, Sage Publications Inc: p1-28. Dix, A., J. E. Findlay, et al. (2004). Human-Computer Interaction. Hoddington, U.K., Pearson Prentice Hall. Dix, A., j. Finlay, et al. (1998). Human-Computer Interaction. Essex, England, Prentice Hall Europe. DomaineHomes, DornuineHomos. (2003) Allandale Virtual Tour, Accessed on August 23, 2003, http://www.clomaine.com.au/designs/alla_fly300/vr_kitc.html. Dumas, J. S. and J. C. Redish (1993). A Practical Guide to Usability Tesfing. Norwood, N.J, Ablex Publishing Corporation. Eddings, J. (1994). How Virtual Reality Works. CA, Ziff-Davis Press. ESPRC, (2004) Engineering and Physical Science Research Council(ESPRC).Accessed on January 24, 2004, http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/website/index.aspx. Flasar, J. (2000). "3D Interaction in Virtual Environment." Galitz, W. 0. (2002). The Essential Guide to User Interface Design. U.S.A, John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Genise, P., (2002) Usability Evaluation: Methods and Techniques, Accessed on January 9, 2004, http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/almstrum/cs370/elvisino/usaEval.html. Goetze, E., VRlog: tracking developments in the VR world, (2002) The state of the VR World in 2002, Accessed on October 10, 2002, http://radio.weblogs.com/0110138/stories/2002/10/23/theStateOfTheVrWorldln2002.html. Goldbaum, H., Wroxton College, (2003) The Virtual NVroxton Abbey, Accessed on May 18, 2003, http://www.wroxtonabbey.org/60.html. HarvardOfficeofNewsandPublicAffairsandQuantumVRInternational, Harvard Office of News and Public Affairs and QuantumVR International, (2000) Harvard Virtual Tour, Accessed on December 11, 2002, http://www.news.harvard.edu/tour/qtvr_tour/index.htm. Heim, M. (1993). The Essence of VR. The Metaphysics of Virtual Reality. New York, Oxford University Press: 109-128. Herndon, K. P., A. van Dam, et al. (1994). "Workshop on Challenges of 3D Interaction." SIGCHI Bulletin 26(October 4): 1-9. Howard, T. (1997). VRML3 and Virtual Worlds. Personal Computer World. IBMUCD, IBM UCD, (2003) Cost justifying ease of use, Accessed on November 14, 2003, http://www-3.ibm.com/ibm/easy/eou_ext.nsf/Publish/23. Jennings, G. (2001). Quantitative Methods of Data Analysis. Tourism Research. Milton, Queensland, John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd: 379. Johnson, C., Proceedings of the HCI'98 Conference on People and Computers XIII, (1998) On the Problems of Validating DesktopVR Innovative User Interfaces: Multimedia and Multi-modal User Interfaces, Wearable Computers and Virtual Reality, Accessed on October, 2001, Kalawsky, R. S. (1999). "VRUSE - a computerised diagnostic tool: for usability evaluation of virtual/synthetic environment systems." Applied Ergonomics 30(1 ): 1 1-25. Kalawsky, R. S., S. T. Bee, et al. (1999). "Human factors evaluation techniques to aid understanding of virtual interfaces." BT Technology Journal 17(1): 128-140. Karat, J. and T. Dayton (1995). Practical education for improving software usability. Conference on Human Factors and Computing Systems: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems, Denver, Colorado, United States, ACM Press/Addison-Wesley Publishing Co. New York, NY, USA. Kaur, K., N. Maiden, et al., (1999) Interacting with Virtual Environments: An Evaluation of a Model of Interaction Virtual Reality and User's Issues, Accessed on October, 2001, Kitchens, S. A. (1998). The QuickTime VR Book, Peachpit Press. Klein, G., R. Calderwood, et al. (1989). "Critical decision Methods for Eliciting Knowledge." IEEE Computer Transactions on Systems. Man and Cybernetics 19(3): 462-472. Koykka, M., R. 011ikainen, et al. (1999). Usability Heuristic Guidelines for 3D Multi-User Worlds. Interfaces for the Global Community, Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, Australia, School of Information Studies, Charles Sturt University, Barooma Street. Krapichler, C., M. Haubner, et al. (1999). "Physicians in virtual environments - multimodal human-computer interaction." Interacting with Computers 11(4): 427-452. Krueger, M. W., T. Gionfriddp, et al. (1985). VIDEOPLACE -- an artificial reality. Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI '85 Conference Proceedings, ACM Press. Kuttuva, M., J. A. Flint, et al. (2003). Virtual Reality-based Training of Upper-limb Amputees in using a Myo-Kinetic Interface. Second International Workshop on Virtual Rehabilitation, Piscataway, NJ, USA. Larsson, S., MedLab Plus, (2003) Patient-specific Surgery Simulation, Accessed on September 12, 2003, http://www.s2.chalmers.se/research/imagc/Research/surgsim/surnmary/oldindex.html. Link Jr, E. A., Aeronautics Learning Laboratory for Science, Technology and Research, (2002) Edwin A. Link, r., Accessed on September 25, 2001, http://www.allstar.fiu.edu/aero/link.htm. Locke, L. F., S. J. Silverman, et al. (1998). Reading and Understanding Research. Thousand Oakes, California, USA, SAGE Publications Incorporated. Ma@dCommunications, Questacon Science Center, (2002) Questacon Virtual Tour, Accessed on May 18, 2003, http://www.questacon.edu.au/vt/rnain.html. MacDonald, L. and J. Vince, Eds. (1994). Interacting with Virtual Environments. West Sussex, John Wiley & Sons. Macpherson, C. and M. Keppell (1998). "Virtual Reality: What is the state of play in education?" Australian Journal Of Educational Technology 14 (1): 60-74. MaxusSystemsInternational, Maxus Systems International, (2001) investor Space, Accessed on September 3, 2003, http://www.maxussystems.com/screens.html. Mayhew, D. J. (1999). Introduction. The Usabilit Enaineerina Lifecycle: A Practioner's Handbook for User Interface Design, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc: 1-5. Merriam, S. B. (2002). Qualitative Research in Practice: Examples for Discussion and Analysis. San Francisco, California, USA, Jossey-Bass. Milgram, P. and F. Kishino (1994). ''A Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays." IEICE Transactions on Information Systems E77-D(I2). Mills, S. and J. Noyes, Interacting with Computers, (1999) Virtual Reality: An Overview of User-Related Design issues Editorial: Virtual Reality and User's Issues, Accessed on October, 2001, Molich, R. and J. Nielsen (1990). "Improving a Human-Computer Dialogue." Communications of ACM 33(3): 338- 348. Monnet, B., Information Market Observatory Working Paper 95/3., ( 1995) Virtual Reality - The Technology and Its Applications, Accessed on April 26, 2003, I. Moore, K. (1999). VRML and java for interactive 3D cartography. Multimedia Cartography. W. Cartwright, M. Peterson and G. Gartner. Berlin-Heidelberg, Springer-Verlag: 205-216. Myers, M. D., ISWorldNet, (1997) Qualitative Research in Information Sysfems, Accessed on October 29, 2002, http://www.rnisq.org/misqd961/is world/. Navy, U. S., Advanced Information Technology Branch of Information Technology Division at the Naval Research Laboratory., (2003) The Virtual Reality Responsive Workbench, Accessed on April 25, 2003, http://www.ait.nrl.navy.mil/vrlab/projects/Workbeneh/Workbench.html. Nieder, G. L. and P. L. Peirce, Wright State University School of Medicine, (1998) Virtual Joint, Accessed on April 26, 2003, Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. Morristown, New Jersey, AP Professional. Nielsen, J. (1994). Heuristic Evaluation. Usability Inspection Methods. J. Nielsen and R. L. Mack. United States, john Wiley & Sons: 25-62. Nielsen, J. (1994). Usability Inspection Methods. CHI'94, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Nielsen, J. (1997). Usability Testing. Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics. G. Salvendy, John Wiley and Sons: 1543-1568. Nielsen, J. and R. L. Mack, Eds. (1994). Usability Inspection Methods. United States, John Wiley & Sons. Nielsen, J. and R. Molich (1990). Heuristic Evaluation of User literfaces. CHI'90. Norris, B. E. (2001). Wayfinding and Navigafion in Virtual Environments. Information Science. Dunedin, University of Otago. Norris, B. E. and B. L. Wong (2000). Activity Breakdowns in QuickTime Virtual Reality Environments. 1st Australasian User Interface Conference, AUIC 2000, Canberra, Australia, IEEE Computer Society. Pentland, A., MIT Lab, (1996) Smart Rooms, Accessed on November 19, 2002, hVp://whitechupel.mcdia.mitedu/vismocl/clemos/smartroom/. Peponis, J., C. Zimring, et al. (1990). "Finding the Building in Wayfinding." Environment and Behavior 22(5): 555-590. Peterson, K. (2001). Interactive Children: Desktop VR in the Classroom. Information Science. Dunedin, University of Otago: 122. Preece, J., Y. Rodgers, et al. (1996). Human-Computer Interaction, Addison-Wesley. Preece, J., Y. Rogers, et al. (2002). Interaction design: beyond human-computer interaction. U.S.A., John Wiley & Sons Inc. Randy, zdoom, (2003) New translation example, Accessed on October 9, 2003, http://zdoom.org/. Resource, S. D. L., Learning Resource Center, Learning Development, University of Wollongong, (2001) Research and Thesis Writing: Research Models and Methods, Accessed on January 18, 2004, http://www.uow.edu.au/research/files/Thesis2.pdf. RichardStrauss, Richar Strauus, (2003) The Villa in Garmisch, Accessed on May 18, 2003, http://www.richardstrauss.at/html e/02 privat/Ofs_index.html Sandra, L. (2002). A study of 3D Interaction: 1-13. Sandra, L. (2002). Task Analysis: 1-6. Saretto, C. J. ()997). A Survey of interaction Issues Facing Navigation in Virtual Worlds. CHI 97: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Los Angeles, USA. Sohl, B., (2002) Distributed Simulation: Concepts and Applications, Accessed on November 22, 2002, http://www.cecs.csulb.edu/~sohl/distributed.sim/rnilapps/milapps-body.html. SonyEricsson, Ericsson Mobile Communications, (2003) Sony Ericcson P800 Mobile Phone, Accessed on May 2, 2003, http://www.sonyericsson.com/P800/rnain.htm. Stake, R. E. (2000). Case Studies. Handbook of Qualitative Research. N..Denzin, K. and Y. S. Lincoln. U.S.A, Sage Publications Inc: p435 - 454. Stanney, K. M., M. Mollaghasemi, et al. (2003). "Usability engineering of virtual environments (VEs): identifying multiple criteria that drive effective VE system design." International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 58(4): 447-481. Steinmetz, R. and K. Nahrstedt (2002). Virtual Reality Modeling Language (VRML). Multimedia Fundamentals. A. Teacher. New Jersey, Prentice Hall. 1: 101-103. Strauss, A. and J. Corbin (1998). Description, Conceptual Ordering, and Theorizing. Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. U.S.A, Sage Publications: 12-14,15-25. Strauss, A. and J. Corbin (1998). Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview. Strategies of Qualitative Inquiry. N. K. Denzin and Y. S. Lincoln. U.S.A., Sage Publications Inc: 158-183. Stuart, R. (2001). The Design of Virtual Environments. New Jersey, Barricade Books Inc. SunMicrosystems, Sun Microsystems, (1999) Profile: Ivan Sutherland, Sun Fellow and VP of Sun Microsystems, Accessed on January 5, 2004, http://www.sun.com/960710/feature3/ivan-profile.html. SydneyOperaHouse, Sydney Opera House, (2003) Sydney Opera House Virtual Tour, Accessed on May 18, 2003, http://www.sydneyopera.house.com/boxoffice/t_virtual_ tour_ fs2.html. Thomas, M. R. (2003). Blending qualitative and quantitative research methods in theses and dissertation. Thousand Oaks, California, USA, Corwin Press, Inc. Travers, M. (2001). Varieties of Symbolic Interactionism: Grounded Theory and Dramaturgical Analysis. Qualitative Research Through Case Studies. U.S.A, Sage Publications: 40-61. Travis, D., T. Watson, et al. (1994). Human Psychology in Virtual Environments. Interacting with Virtual Environments. L. MacDonald and J. Vince. West Sussex, England, John Wiley & Sons Ltd: 43-59. Trochim, W. M. K. (1999). The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Ithaca, New York, Cornell University. UsabilityFirst, (2003) Introduction to Usability, Accessed on October 10, 2003, http://www.usabilityfirst.com/. Userworks.com, (2002) Usability 101, Accesse