Skip to main content

Keys for successful 360° hypervideo design: A user study based on an xAPI analytics dashboard

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the most recent trends in the evaluation of immersive virtual environments is the incorporation of user metrics. In this article, we conduct a user study on a 360° hypervideo, using a dashboard based on detailed metrics obtained from users’ interactions with 360° hypervideos. It is essential to evaluate the quality of experience to monitor service quality from the perspectives of consumers. We demonstrate a framework to examine the user experiences of 360° environments and evaluate them using the xAPI specification, facilitating the development of analytics solutions centered in the user experience; and how the graphs and related data composing the dashboard provide valuable information about ways of navigating and interacting with 360° video experiences, as well as the time invested in them. In the user study, we include the visual perception, attention, tracking and interaction of users watching Proemaid (a 360° multimedia production), collected from an interactive 360° video player in the form of xAPI statements. The Proemaid production has been played in a vast variety of contexts by stakeholders from government, technology and education, among others. Therefore, the quantitative results and the qualitative analysis of the user study are intended to outline a sketch of the users’ ways of navigating, interacting and investing time in 360° hypervideo productions. We consider that these metrics will be very interesting in the specification of new omnidirectional storyboards for film producers of content in 360°. Finally, we propose potential directions for empirical investigation that highlight its great potential in many fields.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. https://www.adobe.com/products/captivate.html

  2. https://articulate.com/360/storyline

  3. https://edpuzzle.com/

  4. https://learn.playposit.com/learn/

  5. https://www.workday.com/en-us/applications/human-capital-management/learning.html

  6. http://exchange.kaltura.com/content/rapt-media

  7. https://vialogues.com/

  8. https://www.youtube.com/analytics

  9. https://facebook360.fb.com/learn

  10. https://wistia.com/video-marketing/360-demo

  11. https://www.finwe.fi/

  12. http://www.proemaid.org/en/

  13. https://ltim.uib.es/proemaid

  14. https://registry.tincanapi.com/

  15. http://xapi.vocab.pub/describe/?url=https://w3id.org/xapi/video

References

  1. Acharya S, Smith BC, Parnes P (1999) Characterizing user access to videos on the World Wide Web. In Proceedings of Multimedia Computing and Networking (MMCN 2000), SPIE 3969. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.373516

  2. Advanced Distributed Learning. The xAPI Specification. https://github.com/adlnet/xAPI-Spec/. Accessed 9 March 2020

  3. Agarwala M, Hsiao IH, Chae HS, Natriello G (2012) Vialogues: videos and dialogues based social learning environment. In proceedings of the 12th IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT 2012), 629–633. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2012.127

  4. Aubert O, Prié Y, Canellas C (2014) Leveraging video annotations in video-based e-learning. In proceedings of the 6th international conference on computer supported education - volume 1 (CSEDU 2014), 479–485. https://doi.org/10.5220/0004948604790485

  5. Bakharia A, Kitto K, Pardo A, Gašević D, Dawson S (2016) Recipe for success: lessons learnt from using xAPI within the connected learning analytics toolkit. In proceedings of the sixth international conference on Learning Analytics & Knowledge (LAK ‘16), 378–382. https://doi.org/10.1145/2883851.2883882

  6. Berg A, Scheffel M, Drachsler H, Ternier S, Specht M (2016) Dutch cooking with xAPI recipes: the good, the bad, and the consistent. IEEE 16th international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT), 234–236. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICALT.2016.48

  7. Bibiloni T, Oliver A, Del Molino J (2017) Automatic collection of user behavior in 360° multimedia. Multimed Tools Appl 77:1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-017-5510-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Brar J, Van der Meij H (2017) Complex software training: harnessing and optimizing video instruction. Comput Hum Behav 70:475–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Brinton CG, Buccapatnam S, Chiang M, Poor HV (2016) Mining MOOC clickstreams: video-watching behavior vs. in-video quiz performance. IEEE Trans Signal Process 64(14):3677–3692. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSP.2016.2546228

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Brooks C, Thompson C, Greer J (2013) Visualizing lecture capture usage: A learning analytics case study. In Proceedings of the LAK 2013 Workshop on Analytics on Video-based Learning (WAVe), 9–14. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-983/

  11. Calmettes G, Drummond GB, Vowler SL (2012) Making do with what we have: use your bootstraps. Statistical reporting guidelines. Adv Physiol Educ 36(3):177–180. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2012.239376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cattaneo AAP, Van der Meij H, Aprea C, Sauli F, Zahn C (2018) A model for designing hypervideo-based instructional scenarios. Interact Learn Environ 27:508–529. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2018.1486860

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Chorianopoulos K, Shamma DA, Kennedy L (2013) Social video retrieval: research methods in controlling, sharing, and editing of web video. In Social Media Retrieval, Computer Communications and Networks, 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-4555-4_1

  14. Corbillon X, De Simone F, Simon G (2017) 360-degree video head movement dataset. In proceedings of the 8th ACM on multimedia systems conference (MMSys ‘17), 199–204. https://doi.org/10.1145/3083187.3083215

  15. David EJ, Gutiérrez J, Coutrot A, Perreira da Silva M, Le Callet P (2018) A dataset of head and eye movements for 360° videos. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference (MMSys ‘18), 432–437. https://doi.org/10.1145/3204949.3208139

  16. De Abreu A, Ozcinar C, Smolic A (2017) Look around you: saliency maps for omnidirectional images in VR applications. Ninth international conference on quality of multimedia experience (QoMEX), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/QoMEX.2017.7965634

  17. De Boer J, Kommers PA, De Brock B (2011) Using learning styles and viewing styles in streaming video. Comput Educ 56(3):727–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.10.015

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Debevc M, Kosec P, Holzinger A (2011) Improving multimodal web accessibility for deaf people: sign language interpreter module. Multimed Tools Appl 54:181–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-010-0529-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. G3 International. lxHive. https://github.com/g3i/lxHive. Accessed 9 March 2020

  20. Gaudenzi S (2013) The living documentary: From representing reality to co-creating reality in digital interactive documentary. Goldsmiths, University of London [PhD thesis]. http://research.gold.ac.uk/id/eprint/7997

  21. Giannakos, MN, Chorianopoulos K, Chrisochoides N (2015) Making sense of video analytics: Lessons learned from clickstream interactions, attitudes, and learning outcome in a video-assisted course. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(1). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v16i1.1976

  22. Giannakos MN, Sampson DG, Kidziński Ł (2016) Introduction to smart learning analytics: foundations and developments in video-based learning. Smart Learning Environments 3(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0034-2

  23. Gorissen P, Van Bruggen J, Jochems W (2012) Usage reporting on recorded lectures using educational data mining. Int J Learn Technol 7(1):23–40. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLT.2012.046864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Guo PJ, Kim J, Rubin R (2014) How video production affects student engagement: an empirical study of MOOC videos. In proceedings of the first ACM conference on learning at scale (L@S ‘14), 41–50. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566239

  25. Kevan JM, Ryan PR (2016) Experience API: flexible, decentralized and activity-centric data collection. In Technology, Knowledge and Learning 21(1):143–149. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-015-9260-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim J, Guo PJ, Seaton DT, Mitros P, Gajos KZ, Miller RC (2014) Understanding in-video dropouts and interaction peaks in online lecture videos. In proceedings of the first ACM conference on learning at scale (L@S ‘14), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556325.2566237

  27. Kleftodimos A, Evangelidis G (2014) Using metrics and cluster analysis for analyzing learner video viewing behaviours in educational videos. IEEE/ACS 11th international conference on computer systems and applications (AICCSA), 280–287. https://doi.org/10.1109/AICCSA.2014.7073210

  28. Kleftodimos A, Evangelidis G (2016) Using open source technologies and open internet resources for building an interactive video based learning environment that supports learning analytics. Smart Learning Environments 3:9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0032-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kuzyakov E, Chen S, Peng R (2017) Enhancing high-resolution 360 streaming with view prediction. Facebook. https://code.facebook.com/posts/118926451990297/enhancing-high-resolution-360-streaming-with-view-prediction/

  30. Kwiatek K, Woolner M (2009) Embedding interactive storytelling within still and video panoramas for cultural heritage sites. In 15th international conference on virtual systems and multimedia, 197–202. https://doi.org/10.1109/VSMM.2009.36

  31. Li N, Kidziński Ł, Jermann P, Dillenbourg P (2015) MOOC video interaction patterns: what do they tell us? Design for Teaching and Learning in a networked world. Lect Notes Comput Sci 9307:197–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24258-3_15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lo WC, Fan CL, Lee J, Huang CY, Chen KT, Hsu CH (2017) 360° video viewing dataset in head-mounted virtual reality. In proceedings of the 8th ACM on multimedia systems conference (MMSys ‘17), 211–216. https://doi.org/10.1145/3083187.3083219

  33. Meixner B (2017) Hypervideos and interactive multimedia presentations. ACM computing surveys (CSUR), 50, 1, 9:1–9:34. https://doi.org/10.1145/3038925

  34. Meixner B, Matusik K, Grill C, Kosch H (2012) Towards an easy to use authoring tool for interactive non-linear video. Multimed Tools Appl 70(2):1251–1276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-012-1218-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Meixner B, John S, Handschigl C (2015) SIVA suite: framework for hypervideo creation, playback and management. In proceedings of the 23rd ACM international conference on multimedia (MM ‘15), 713–716. https://doi.org/10.1145/2733373.2807413

  36. Meixner B, John S, Handschigl C (2016) SIVA suite: an open-source framework for hypervideos. SIGMultimedia Records 8(1):10–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/2898367.2898371

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Mirriahi N, Vigentini N (2017) Analytics of learner video use. In handbook of learning analytics, 251–267. Society for Learning Analytics Research (SoLAR). https://doi.org/10.18608/hla17.022

  38. Morikawa H, Nagao T, Hasegawa D, Sakuta H, Nakayama E (2017) Evaluation of educational material using 360-degree video for hazard prediction training in nursing. The Japanese Journal of Ergonomics 53(2):758–759. https://doi.org/10.5100/jje.53.S758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Neng LAR, Chambel T (2010) Get around 360 degree hypervideo. In proceedings of the 14th international academic MindTrek conference: envisioning future media environments, MindTrek ‘10, 119–122. https://doi.org/10.1145/1930488.1930512

  40. Neng LAR, Chambel T (2012) Get around 360° hypervideo: its design and evaluation. International Journal of Ambient Computing and Intelligence (IJACI) 4(4):40–57. https://doi.org/10.4018/jaci.2012100103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. NumFOCUS. Pandas. https://pandas.pydata.org/. Accessed 9 March 2020

  42. NumFOCUS. Bokeh. http://bokeh.pydata.org/. Accessed 9 March 2020

  43. Oliver A, Del Molino J, Vidal ME, Bibiloni T (2017) 360° hypervideo: An interactive documentary around the refugee crisis in Greece. In Proceedings of the 6th Iberoamerican Conference on Applications and Usability of Interactive TV - jAUTI 2017, 162–171 http://jauti2017.web.ua.pt/index.php/theconference/

  44. Oliver A, Del Molino J, Bibiloni T (2018) Automatic view tracking in 360° multimedia using xAPI. In applications and usability of interactive television, jAUTI 2017. Communications in Computer and Information Science (CCIS) 813:117–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90170-1_9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Oliver A, Del Molino J, Cañellas M, Clar A, Bibiloni A (2019) VR Macintosh museum: case study of a WebVR application. In world conference on information systems and technologies, WorldCIST’19. Advances in intelligent systems and Computing, vol. 931. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16184-2_27

  46. Paternò F, Schiavone AG, Pitardi P (2016) Timelines for mobile web usability evaluation. In proceedings of the international working conference on advanced visual interfaces (AVI ‘16), 88–91. https://doi.org/10.1145/2909132.2909272

  47. Pavel A, Hartmann B, Agrawala M (2017) Shot orientation controls for interactive cinematography with 360 video. In proceedings of the 30th annual ACM symposium on user Interface software and technology (UIST ‘17), 289–297. https://doi.org/10.1145/3126594.3126636

  48. Preston M, Campbell G, Ginsburg H, Sommer P, Moretti F (2005) Developing new tools for video analysis and communication to promote critical thinking. In Proceedings of World Conference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia & Telecommunications (ED-MEDIA 2005), 1, 4357–4364. https://www.learntechlib.org/p/20763/

  49. Rabelo T, Lama M, Vidal JC, Amorim R (2017) Comparative study of xAPI validation tools. IEEE Frontiers in education conference (FIE), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/FIE.2017.8190729

  50. Rai Y, Gutiérrez J, Le Callet P (2017) A dataset of head and eye movements for 360 degree images. In proceedings of the 8th ACM on multimedia systems conference (MMSys ‘17), 205–210. https://doi.org/10.1145/3083187.3083218

  51. Risko EF, Foulsham T, Dawson S, Kingstone A (2013) The collaborative lecture annotation system (CLAS): a new TOOL for distributed learning. IEEE Trans Learn Technol 6(1):4–13. https://doi.org/10.1109/TLT.2012.15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Rovelo Ruiz GA, Vanacken D, Luyten K, Abad F, Camahort E (2014) Multi-viewer gesture-based interaction for omni-directional video. In proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (CHI ‘14), 4077–4086. https://doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557113

  53. Sauli F, Cattaneo A, Van der Meij H (2018) Hypervideo for educational purposes: a literature review on a multifaceted technological tool. Technol Pedagog Educ 27(1):115–134. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2017.1407357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Sawhney N, Balcom D, Smith I (1996) HyperCafe: narrative and aesthetic properties of hypervideo. In proceedings of the the seventh ACM conference on HYPERTEXT (HYPERTEXT ‘96), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/234828.234829

  55. Schwan S, Riempp R (2004) The cognitive benefits of interactive videos: learning to tie nautical knots. Learn Instr 14(3):293–305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2004.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Seidel N (2017) Analytics on video-based learning. A literature review. In Proceedings of DeLFI and GMW Workshops 2017. http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2092/

  57. Sottilare RA, Long RA, Goldberg BS (2017) Enhancing the experience application program interface (xAPI) to improve domain competency modeling for adaptive instruction. In proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on learning @ scale (L@S ‘17), 265–268. https://doi.org/10.1145/3051457.3054001

  58. The SciPy Community. Scipy.org: Statistics. https://docs.scipy.org/doc/scipy-1.4.1/reference/stats.html. Accessed 9 March 2020

  59. Theodosiou Z, Kounoudes A, Tsapatsoulis N, Milis M (2009) MuLVAT: A video annotation tool based on XML-dictionaries and shot clustering. In Artificial Neural Networks (ICANN 2009). Lect Notes Comput Sci:5769. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-04277-5_92

  60. Wijnants M, Van Erum K, Quax P, Lamotte W (2016) Augmented ODV: web-driven annotation and interactivity enhancement of 360 degree video in both 2D and 3D. Web information systems and technologies (WEBIST 2015), 47–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30996-5_3

  61. Yousef AMF, Chatti MA, Danoyan N, Thüs H, Schroeder U (2015) Video-mapper: a video annotation tool to support collaborative learning in MOOCs. In proceedings of the third European MOOCs stakeholders summit (EMOOCs), 131–140. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/279203366

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors want to thank the people that appear in the documentary for sharing their stories with us. We also want to thank PROEM-AID for their work where they are much needed, and especially Manuel Elviro Vidal for recording the scenes shown in the documentary in situ.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Javier del Molino.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

del Molino, J., Bibiloni, T. & Oliver, A. Keys for successful 360° hypervideo design: A user study based on an xAPI analytics dashboard. Multimed Tools Appl 79, 22771–22796 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09059-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09059-2

Keywords