skip to main content
research-article

On the Use of Multi-sensory Cues in Symmetric and Asymmetric Shared Collaborative Virtual Spaces

Published:22 April 2021Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Physical face-to-face collaboration with someone gives a higher-quality experience compared to mediated communication options, such as a phone- or video-based chat. Participants can share rich sensory cues to multiple human senses in a physical space. Also, the perceptual sensing of the surrounding environment including other peoples' reactions can influence human communication and emotion, and thus collaborative performance. Shared spaces in virtual environments provide degraded sensory experiences because most commercial virtual reality systems typically provide only visual and audio feedback. The impact of richer, multi-sensory feedback on joint decision-making tasks in VR is still an open area of research. Two independent studies exploring this topic are presented in this paper. We implemented a multi-sensory system that delivers vision, audio, tactile, and smell feedback, and we compared the system to a typical VR system. The scenario placed two users in a virtual theme-park safari ride with a number of non-player character (NPC) passengers to simulate realistic scenarios compared to the real-world and we varied the type and complexity of NPCs reactions to participants.

In Experiment 1, we provided both users with either multi-sensory or typical sensory feedback symmetrically as a between-subjects factor, and used NPC reaction type as a within-subjects factor. In Experiment 2, we provided sensory feedback asymmetrically to each user (i.e., one had multi-sensory cues and the other had typical sensory cues) as a between-subjects factor, and used NPC reaction type as a within-subjects factor. We found that the number of sensory channels and NPC reactions did not influence user perception significantly under either symmetric or asymmetric sensory feedback conditions. However, after accounting for individual personality traits (e.g., assertive, passive), as well as any existing relationship between the pairs, we found that increasing the number of sensory channels can significantly improve subjective responses.

References

  1. Jeremy N. Bailenson, Jim Blascovich, Andrew C. Beall, and Jack M. Loomis. 2003. Interpersonal Distance in Immersive Virtual Environments. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 29, 7 (2003), 819--833. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029007002 PMID: 15018671.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Aryabrata Basu, Andrew Raij, and Kyle Johnsen. 2012. Ubiquitous Collaborative Activity Virtual Environments. In Proceedings of the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (Seattle, Washington, USA) (CSCW '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 647--650. https://doi.org/10.1145/2145204.2145302Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Mark Billinghurst, Suzanne Weghorst, and Thomas A. Furness. 1998. Shared space: An augmented reality approach for computer supported collaborative work. Virtual Reality, Vol. 3 (1998), 25--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Anna C. Bocar. 2017. Aggressive, Passive, and Assertive: Which Communication Style Is Commonly Used by College Students? SSRN (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Ernest Cline. 2011. Ready player one. New York: Crown Publishers.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Benjamin H. Detenber, Robert F. Simons, and Jason E. Reiss. 2000. The Emotional Significance of Color in Television Presentations. Media Psychology, Vol. 2 (2000), 331 -- 355.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. A. Dey, H. Chen, C. Zhuang, M. Billinghurst, and R. W. Lindeman. 2018. Effects of Sharing Real-Time Multi-Sensory Heart Rate Feedback in Different Immersive Collaborative Virtual Environments. In 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). 165--173. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR.2018.00052Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Ecorys. 2017. Ecorys report | VR & AR set to create up to 480,000 jobs by 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/connect-university/vr-ar-set-create-480000-jobs-2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnathon P Ehsani, Fearghal O'Brien, and Bruce Simmons-Morton. 2017. Comparing G-Force Measurement Between a Smartphone App and an In-Vehicle Accelerometer. In Proceedings of the Ninth International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design. 221--227.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. M. Feng, A. Dey, and R. W. Lindeman. 2016a. The effect of multi-sensory cues on performance and experience during walking in immersive virtual environments. In 2016 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR). 173--174. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2016.7504709Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. M. Feng, A. Dey, and R. W. Lindeman. 2016b. An initial exploration of a multi-sensory design space: Tactile support for walking in immersive virtual environments. In 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). 95--104. https://doi.org/10.1109/3DUI.2016.7460037Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. M. Feng, R. W. Lindeman, H. Abdel-Moati, and J. C. Lindeman. 2015. Haptic ChairIO: A system to study the effect of wind and floor vibration feedback on spatial orientation in VEs. In 2015 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). 149--150. https://doi.org/10.1109/3DUI.2015.7131744Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Carlos Flavián, Sergio Ibáñez-Sánchez, and Carlos Orús. 2019. The impact of virtual, augmented and mixed reality technologies on the customer experience. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 100 (2019), 547--560. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.050Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Faul Franz, Erdfelder Edgar, Lang Albert-Georg, and Buchner Axel. 2007. G*Power 3: A Flexible Statistical Power Analysis Program for The Social, Behavioral, and Biomedical Sciences. Behavior Research Methods, Vol. 39, 175--191 (2007).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Rebecca Fribourg, Ferran Argelaguet, Ludovic Hoyet, and Anatole Lécuyer. 2018. Studying the Sense of Embodiment in VR Shared Experiences. 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (2018), 273--280.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Susan R. Fussell, Robert E. Kraut, and Jane Siegel. 2000. Coordination of Communication: Effects of Shared Visual Context on Collaborative Work (CSCW '00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 21--30. https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.358947Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Jolene Galegher and Robert E. Kraut. 1992. Computer-Mediated Communication and Collaborative Writing: Media Influence and Adaptation to Communication Constraints. In Proceedings of the 1992 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work (Toronto, Ontario, Canada) (CSCW '92). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 155--162. https://doi.org/10.1145/143457.143474Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Gheorghita Ghinea and Oluwakemi Ademoye. 2012. The sweet smell of success: Enhancing multimedia applications with olfaction. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications (TOMM), Vol. 8, 1 (2012), 2.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. William Gibson. 1984. Neuromancer. New York :Ace Science Fiction Books.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. J. G. Grandi, H. G. Debarba, and A. Maciel. 2019. Characterizing Asymmetric Collaborative Interactions in Virtual and Augmented Realities. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 127--135.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Jan Gugenheimer, Evgeny Stemasov, Julian Frommel, and Enrico Rukzio. 2017. ShareVR: Enabling Co-Located Experiences for Virtual Reality between HMD and Non-HMD Users. Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (2017).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. John Harris and Mark Hancock. 2019. To Asymmetry and Beyond! Improving Social Connectedness by Increasing Designed Interdependence in Cooperative Play. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article Paper 9, bibinfonumpages12 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300239Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Heilig, Morton L. 1961. Sensorama simulator. https://patents.google.com/patent/US3050870A/enGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Jim Hollan and Scott Stornetta. 1992. Beyond Being There. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Monterey, California, USA) (CHI '92). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 119--125. https://doi.org/10.1145/142750.142769Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Ying Hua, Vivian Loftness, Robert Kraut, and Kevin M Powell. 2010. Workplace Collaborative Space Layout Typology and Occupant Perception of Collaboration Environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, Vol. 37, 3 (2010), 429--448. https://doi.org/10.1068/b35011Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Matthieu Ischer, Naëm Baron, Christophe Mermoud, Isabelle Cayeux, Christelle Porcherot, David Sander, and Sylvain Delplanque. 2014. How incorporation of scents could enhance immersive virtual experiences. Frontiers in Psychology, Vol. 5 (July 2014). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00736Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Hiroshi Ishii, Minoru Kobayashi, and Jonathan Grudin. 1993. Integration of Interpersonal Space and Shared Workspace: ClearBoard Design and Experiments. ACM Trans. Inf. Syst., Vol. 11, 4 (Oct. 1993), 349--375. https://doi.org/10.1145/159764.159762Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Randolph L. Jackson and Eileen Fagan. 2000. Collaboration and Learning within Immersive Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments (San Francisco, California, USA) (CVE '00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 83--92. https://doi.org/10.1145/351006.351018Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. B. Johanson, A. Fox, and T. Winograd. 2002. The Interactive Workspaces project: experiences with ubiquitous computing rooms. IEEE Pervasive Computing, Vol. 1, 2 (2002), 67--74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Sungchul Jung and Charles E. Hughes. 2016. The Effects of Indirect Real Body Cues of Irrelevant Parts on Virtual Body Ownership and Presence. In ICAT-EGVE 2016 - International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence and Eurographics Symposium on Virtual Environments. 107--114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Sungchul Jung, Christian Sandor, Pamela J Wisniewski, and Charles E. Hughes. 2017. RealME: The Influence of Body and Hand Representations on Body Ownership and Presence. In Proceedings of the 5th Symposium on Spatial User Interaction, ACM SUI 2017. 3--11.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Sungchul Jung, Pamela J Wisniewski, and Charles E. Hughes. 2018. In Limbo: The Effect of Gradual Visual Transition between Real and Virtual on Virtual Body Ownership Illusion and Presence. In Proceedings of the 25th IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, IEEE VR 2018.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Sungchul Jung, Andrew L. Wood, Simon Hoermann, Pramuditha L. Abhayawardhana, and Robert W. Lindeman. 2020. The Impact of Multi-sensory Stimuli on Confidence Levels for Perceptual-cognitive Tasks in VR. In Proceedings of the 27th IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, IEEE VR 2020.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Konstantina Kilteni, Antonella Maselli, Konrad P. Kording, and Mel Slater. 2015. Over My Fake Body: Body Ownership Illusions for Studying The Multisensory Basis of Own-Body Perception. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, Vol. 9, 4 (MARCH 2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Ernst Kruijff, Alexander Marquardt, Christina Trepkowski, Jonas Schild, and André Hinkenjann. 2017. Designed emotions: challenges and potential methodologies for improving multisensory cues to enhance user engagement in immersive systems. The Visual Computer, Vol. 33, 4 (April 2017), 471--488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00371-016-1294-0Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Ernst Kruijff, Christina Trepkowski, and Robert W. Lindeman. 2015. The Effect of Vibration and Low-frequency Audio on Full-body Haptic Sensations. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology (VRST '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 194--194. https://doi.org/10.1145/2821592.2821626 event-place: Beijing, China.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. William Little. 2016. Introduction to Sociology 2nd canadian edition ed.). https://opentextbc.ca/introductionto.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Takamichi Nakamoto and Hai Pham Dinh Minh. 2007. Improvement of olfactory display using solenoid valves. IEEE, 179--186.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Eleuda Nunez, Soichiro Matsuda, Masakazu Hirokawa, Junichi Yamamoto, and Kenji Suzuki. 2018. Effect of Sensory Feedback on Turn-Taking Using Paired Devices for Children with ASD. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, Vol. 2, 4 (Sep 2018), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti2040061Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. World Health Organization. 2020. Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak. https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Ye Pan and Anthony Steed. 2017. The impact of self-avatars on trust and collaboration in shared virtual environments. PLOS ONE, Vol. 12, 12 (12 2017), 1--20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0189078Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Kasey Panetta. 2020. Gartner Top 10 Strategic Technology Trends for 2020. https://www.gartner.com/smarterwithgartner/gartner-top-10-strategic-technology-trends-for-2020/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Palacín R Powell, J.P. 2015. Passenger Stability Within Moving Railway Vehicles: Limits on Maximum Longitudinal Acceleration. Urban Rail Transit, Vol. 1, 95--103 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Jun Rekimoto and Masanori Saitoh. 1999. Augmented Surfaces: A Spatially Continuous Work Space for Hybrid Computing Environments. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA) (CHI '99). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 378--385. https://doi.org/10.1145/302979.303113Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Daniel Roth, Marc Erich Latoschik, Kai Vogeley, and Gary Bente. 2015. Hybrid Avatar-Agent Technology -- A Conceptual Step Towards Mediated "Social" Virtual Reality and its Respective Challenges. i-com, Vol. 14, 2 (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. Daniel Roth, David Mal, Christian Felix Purps, Peter Kullmann, and Marc Erich Latoschik. 2018. Injecting Nonverbal Mimicry with Hybrid Avatar-Agent Technologies: A NaÏVe Approach. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Spatial User Interaction (Berlin, Germany) (SUI '18). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 69--73. https://doi.org/10.1145/3267782.3267791Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Junta Sato, Kaori Ohtsu, Yuichi Bannai, and Ken-ichi Okada. 2009. Effective presentation technique of scent using small ejection quantities of odor. IEEE, 151--158.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  48. Richard Skarbez, Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., and Mary C. Whitton. 2017. A Survey of Presence and Related Concepts. ACM Comput. Surv., Vol. 50, 6 (Nov. 2017), 96:1--96:39. https://doi.org/10.1145/3134301Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. Mel Slater. 2009. Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behaviour in immersive virtual environments. Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, Vol. 364, 1535 (December 2009), 3549--3557. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0138Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Diane H. Sonnenwald, Kelly L. Maglaughlin, and Mary C. Whitton. 2004. Designing to Support Situation Awareness Across Distances: An Example from a Scientific Collaboratory. Inf. Process. Manage., Vol. 40, 6 (Nov. 2004), 989--1011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2003.10.002Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. Anthony Steed, Ye Pan, Fiona Zisch, and William Steptoe. 2016. The Impact of a Self-Avatar on Cognitive Load in Immersive Virtual Reality. In In IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality. 67--76.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  52. Anthony Steed, Mel Slater, Amela Sadagic, Adrian Bullock, and Jolanda G. Tromp. 1999. Leadership and collaboration in shared virtual environments. Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality (Cat. No. 99CB36316) (1999), 112--115.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. A. Steed, W. Steptoe, W. Oyekoya, F. Pece, T. Weyrich, J. Kautz, D. Friedman, A. Peer, M. Solazzi, F. Tecchia, M. Bergamasco, and M. Slater. 2012. Beaming: An Asymmetric Telepresence System. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, Vol. 32, 6 (Nov 2012), 10--17. https://doi.org/10.1109/MCG.2012.110Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. Zsolt Szalavari, Dieter Schmalstieg, Anton Fuhrmann, and Michael Gervautz. 1998. "Studierstube" - An Environment for Collaboration in Augmented Reality 1 ed.).., Seite von - bis: pp. 37--49.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. Martin Usoh, Ernest Catena, Sima Arman, and Mel Slater. 2000. Using Presence Questionnaires in Reality. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ., Vol. 9, 5 (Oct. 2000), 497--503. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474600566989Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. Amy Voida, Stephen Voida, Saul Greenberg, and Helen Ai He. 2008. Asymmetry in Media Spaces. In Proceedings of the 2008 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (San Diego, CA, USA) (CSCW '08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 313--322. https://doi.org/10.1145/1460563.1460615Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. On the Use of Multi-sensory Cues in Symmetric and Asymmetric Shared Collaborative Virtual Spaces

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
          Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction  Volume 5, Issue CSCW1
          CSCW
          April 2021
          5016 pages
          EISSN:2573-0142
          DOI:10.1145/3460939
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2021 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 22 April 2021
          Published in pacmhci Volume 5, Issue CSCW1

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader