skip to main content
10.1145/3489410.3489428acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pageschi-greeceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Eliciting requirements for a multisensory eXtended Reality platform for training and informal learning

Authors Info & Claims
Published:25 November 2021Publication History

ABSTRACT

Aiming at bridging the gap between the recent advancements in eXtended Reality (XR) research and real-world scenarios, in this paper we describe the first steps of an iterative user-centered methodology developed to elicit user requirements and to design the scenarios for a multi-sensory collaborative XR platform, in the framework of the BRIDGES project. The platform aims to be customizable and flexible, and is intended for use in different pedagogical contexts, instantiated by two pilot scenarios: a) XR training for first-responders and fire brigade staff at international airports and b) XR informal learning experiences addressed to visitors of museums and cultural centers. Through a series of workshops and focus groups with users from relevant organizations, we collected a total of nearly 100 pedagogical, technological, experiential, operational and other user needs from within these two different contexts, and discuss here the challenges and limitations but also the opportunities that were encountered.

References

  1. Chadia Abras, Diane Maloney-Krichmar, Jenny Preece, 2004. User-centered design. Bainbridge, W. Encyclopedia of Human-Computer Interaction. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications 37, 4 (2004), 445–456.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Belén Agulló, Mario Montagud, and Isaac Fraile. 2019. Making interaction with virtual reality accessible: rendering and guiding methods for subtitles. AI EDAM 33, 4 (2019), 416–428.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Nigel Bevan, Jim Carter, Jonathan Earthy, Thomas Geis, and Susan Harker. 2018. What are user requirements? Developing an ISO standard. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 3–13.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. James P Bliss, Philip D Tidwell, and Michael A Guest. 1997. The effectiveness of virtual reality for administering spatial navigation training to firefighters. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 6, 1(1997), 73–86. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Mark Blythe, Gordon Baxter, Peter Wright, Keith Cheverst, Karen Clarke, Guy Dewsbury, Mark Rouncefield, and Ian Sommerville. 2003. Gathering requirements for inclusive design. In Second BSC HCI Group Workshop on Culture and HCI Bridging Cultural and Digital Divides. 65–71.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Simone Borsci, Glyn Lawson, and Simon Broome. 2015. Empirical evidence, evaluation criteria and challenges for the effectiveness of virtual and mixed reality tools for training operators of car service maintenance. Computers in Industry 67(2015), 17–26. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Moohyun Cha, Soonhung Han, Jaikyung Lee, and Byungil Choi. 2012. A virtual reality based fire training simulator integrated with fire dynamics data. Fire Safety Journal 50(2012), 12–24.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Dimitrios Christopoulos, Dimitris Efraimoglou, Eytichia Chatzi, and George Sofianopoulos. 2017. Using virtual reality and storytelling to disseminate heritage sites, “Agia Sophia: 1500 years of history” case study. In Euromed 2017 International Conference on Digital Heritage, Volos, 1-3 December 2017, Conference proceedings. 316–323.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Dimitrios Christopoulos, Pavlos Mavridis, Anthousis Andreadis, and John N Karigiannis. 2011. Using Virtual Environments to Tell the Story:” The Battle of Thermopylae”. In 2011 Third International Conference on Games and Virtual Worlds for Serious Applications. IEEE, 84–91. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Rory MS Clifford, Simon Hoermann, Nicolas Marcadet, Hamish Oliver, Mark Billinghurst, and Robert W Lindeman. 2018. Evaluating the effects of realistic communication disruptions in VR training for aerial firefighting. In 2018 10th International Conference on Virtual Worlds and Games for Serious Applications (VS-Games). IEEE, 1–8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Rory MS Clifford, Humayun Khan, Simon Hoermann, Mark Billinghurst, and Robert W Lindeman. 2018. Development of a multi-sensory virtual reality training simulator for airborne firefighters supervising aerial wildfire suppression. In 2018 IEEE Workshop on Augmented and Virtual Realities for Good (VAR4Good). IEEE, 1–5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Sabrina R Cohen-Hatton and RC Honey. 2015. Goal-oriented training affects decision-making processes in virtual and simulated fire and rescue environments.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 21, 4 (2015), 395.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Geoff Cooper, Christine Hine, Janet Rachel, and Steve Woolgar. 1995. Ethnography and human-computer interaction. CAMBRIDGE SERIES ON HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION (1995), 11–36. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. Andy Crabtree. 2003. Designing collaborative systems: A practical guide to ethnography. Vol. 200. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Sarah A Douglas, Arthur E Kirkpatrick, and I Scott MacKenzie. 1999. Testing pointing device performance and user assessment with the ISO 9241, Part 9 standard. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 215–222. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Hendrik Engelbrecht, Robert W Lindeman, and Simon Hoermann. 2019. A SWOT analysis of the field of virtual reality for firefighter training. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 6 (2019), 101.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Anna Felnhofer, Oswald D Kothgassner, Leon Beutl, Helmut Hlavacs, and Ilse Kryspin-Exner. 2012. Is virtual reality made for men only? Exploring gender differences in the sense of presence. Proceedings of the International Society on presence research (2012), 103–112.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Tabitha Frahm. 2018. A usability study of virtual reality systems: on best practices for user-centered design in virtual reality gaming interfaces. Ph.D. Dissertation. https://doi.org/10.17615/m14j-hs61Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Guo Freeman and Divine Maloney. 2021. Body, avatar, and me: The presentation and perception of self in social virtual reality. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 4, CSCW3(2021), 1–27. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Simone Grassini and Karin Laumann. 2020. Are modern head-mounted displays sexist? A systematic review on gender differences in HMD-mediated virtual reality. Frontiers in psychology 11 (2020), 1604.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Edbert B Hsu, Yang Li, Jamil D Bayram, David Levinson, Samuel Yang, and Colleen Monahan. 2013. State of virtual reality based disaster preparedness and response training. PLoS currents 5(2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Johan Jenvald and Magnus Morin. 2004. Simulation-supported live training for emergency response in hazardous environments. Simulation & Gaming 35, 3 (2004), 363–377. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Seung-Gon Jeon, Jaeho Han, Yonggeol Jo, and Kyungsik Han. 2019. Being more focused and engaged in firefighting training: Applying user-centered design to vr system development. In 25th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. 1–11. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Markus Klann. 2007. Playing with fire: user-centered design of wearable computing for emergency response. In International Workshop on Mobile Information Technology for Emergency Response. Springer, 116–125. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Sarah Lopez, Yi Yang, Kevin Beltran, Soo Jung Kim, Jennifer Cruz Hernandez, Chelsy Simran, Bingkun Yang, and Beste F Yuksel. 2019. Investigating implicit gender bias and embodiment of white males in virtual reality with full body visuomotor synchrony. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Cayley MacArthur, Arielle Grinberg, Daniel Harley, and Mark Hancock. 2021. You’re Making Me Sick: A Systematic Review of How Virtual Reality Research Considers Gender & Cybersickness. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–15. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Martin Maguire and Nigel Bevan. 2002. User requirements analysis. In IFIP World Computer Congress, TC 13. Springer, 133–148. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. D. Mellet d’Huart. 1995. FROM REALITY TO “THE REAL”: Augmented and Virtual Reality for Training.Virtual Reality: Cognitive Foundations, Technological Issues & Philosophical Implications (1995), pp. 129–139. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Fanxing Meng and Wei Zhang. 2014. Way-finding during a fire emergency: an experimental study in a virtual environment. Ergonomics 57, 6 (2014), 816–827.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Tomasz Miaskiewicz and Kenneth A Kozar. 2011. Personas and user-centered design: How can personas benefit product design processes?Design studies 32, 5 (2011), 417–430.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Aitor Moreno, Jorge Posada, Álvaro Segura, Ander Arbelaiz, and Alejandro García-Alonso. 2014. Interactive fire spread simulations with extinguishment support for virtual reality training tools. Fire safety journal 64(2014), 48–60.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Martez Mott, Edward Cutrell, Mar Gonzalez Franco, Christian Holz, Eyal Ofek, Richard Stoakley, and Meredith Ringel Morris. 2019. Accessible by design: An opportunity for virtual reality. In 2019 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality Adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct). IEEE, 451–454.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  33. Lene Nielsen. 2013. Personas in a More User-Focused World. In Personas-User Focused Design. Springer, 129–154.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Niels Christian Nilsson, Stefania Serafin, Frank Steinicke, and Rolf Nordahl. 2018. Natural walking in virtual reality: A review. Computers in Entertainment (CIE) 16, 2 (2018), 1–22. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. G Ozcan-Deniz. 2019. Expanding applications of virtual reality in construction industry: A multiple case study approach. Journal of Construction Engineering 2, 2 (2019), 48–66.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Nikolaos Pellas, Stylianos Mystakidis, and Ioannis Kazanidis. 2021. Immersive Virtual Reality in K-12 and Higher Education: A systematic review of the last decade scientific literature. Virtual Reality 25, 3 (sep 2021), 835–861. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-020-00489-9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Sara Perry, Maria Roussou, Maria Economou, Hilary Young, and Laia Pujol. 2017. Moving beyond the virtual museum: Engaging visitors emotionally. In 2017 23rd International Conference on Virtual System & Multimedia (VSMM). IEEE, 1–8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Sarah Pink, Kerstin Leder Mackley, Val Mitchell, Marcus Hanratty, Carolina Escobar-Tello, Tracy Bhamra, and Roxana Morosanu. 2013. Applying the Lens of Sensory Ethnography to Sustainable HCI. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. 20, 4, Article 25 (Sept. 2013), 18 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/2494261 Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Iana Podkosova. 2019. Walkable Multi-User VR: Effects of Physical and Virtual Colocation. Ph.D. Dissertation. 193. https://publik.tuwien.ac.at/files/publik_278458.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Iana Podkosova, Khrystyna Vasylevska, Christian Schoenauer, Emanuel Vonach, Peter Fikar, Elisabeth Bronederk, and Hannes Kaufmann. 2016. ImmersiveDeck: A large-scale wireless VR system for multiple users. In 2016 IEEE 9th Workshop on Software Engineering and Architectures for Realtime Interactive Systems (SEARIS). IEEE, 1–7.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Iana Podkosova, Katja Zibrek, Julien Pettré, Ludovic Hoyet, and Anne-Hélène Olivier. 2021. Exploring behaviour towards avatars and agents in immersive virtual environments with mixed-agency interactions. In 2021 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). IEEE, 140–143.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  42. Joseph Psotka. 1995. Immersive training systems: Virtual reality and education and training. Instructional science 23, 5-6 (1995), 405–431.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Diego Puel. 2018. An authoring system for VR-based firefighting commanders training. Electronic Imaging 2018, 3 (2018), 469–1.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Radiah Rivu, Yumeng Zhou, Robin Welsch, Ville Mäkelä, and Florian Alt. [n.d.]. When Friends become Strangers: Understanding the Influence of Avatar Gender On Interpersonal Distance in Virtual Reality. ([n. d.]).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  45. Maria Roussou. 2004. Learning by doing and learning through play: an exploration of interactivity in virtual environments for children. Computers in Entertainment (CIE) 2, 1 (2004), 10–10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Maria Roussou and Dimitris Efraimoglou. 1999. High-end interactive media in the museum. In International Conference on Computer Graphics and Interactive Techniques: ACM SIGGRAPH 99 Conference abstracts and applications, Vol. 8. 59–62. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Maria Roussou, Akrivi Katifori, Laia Pujol, Maria Vayanou, and Stefan J Rennick-Egglestone. 2013. A life of their own: museum visitor personas penetrating the design lifecycle of a mobile experience. In CHI’13 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 547–552. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Camille Sagnier, Emilie Loup-Escande, and Gérard Valléry. 2019. Effects of gender and prior experience in immersive user experience with virtual reality. In International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics. Springer, 305–314.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. Stephanie Schulze, Toni Pence, Ned Irvine, and Curry Guinn. 2019. The effects of embodiment in virtual reality on implicit gender bias. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 361–374.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  50. Sharad Sharma, Phillip Devreaux, David Scribner, Jock Grynovicki, and Peter Grazaitis. 2017. Megacity: a collaborative virtual reality environment for emergency response, training, and decision making. Electronic Imaging 2017, 1 (2017), 70–77.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  51. Donghee Shin. 2018. Empathy and embodied experience in virtual environment: To what extent can virtual reality stimulate empathy and embodied experience?Computers in Human Behavior 78 (2018), 64–73. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  52. Mel Slater and Maria V Sanchez-Vives. 2016. Enhancing our lives with immersive virtual reality. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 3 (2016), 74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  53. Sara K Sweeney, Phyllis Newbill, Todd Ogle, and Krista Terry. 2018. Using augmented reality and virtual environments in historic places to scaffold historical empathy. TechTrends 62, 1 (2018), 114–118.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  54. Thomas Thurnell-Read and Andrew Parker. 2008. Men, masculinities and firefighting: Occupational identity, shop-floor culture and organisational change. Emotion, Space and Society 1, 2 (2008), 127–134.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. Mary C Whitton. 2003. Making virtual environments compelling. Commun. ACM 46, 7 (2003), 40–47. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  56. F Michael Williams-Bell, Bill Kapralos, Andrew Hogue, BM Murphy, and EJ Weckman. 2015. Using serious games and virtual simulation for training in the fire service: a review. Fire Technology 51, 3 (2015), 553–584.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. Z Xu, XZ Lu, Hong Guan, C Chen, and AZ Ren. 2014. A virtual reality based fire training simulator with smoke hazard assessment capacity. Advances in engineering software 68 (2014), 1–8. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Eliciting requirements for a multisensory eXtended Reality platform for training and informal learning
              Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

              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
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Other conferences
                CHI Greece 2021: CHI Greece 2021: 1st International Conference of the ACM Greek SIGCHI Chapter
                November 2021
                172 pages
                ISBN:9781450385787
                DOI:10.1145/3489410

                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: 25 November 2021

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • research-article
                • Research
                • Refereed limited
              • Article Metrics

                • Downloads (Last 12 months)41
                • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)9

                Other Metrics

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader