skip to main content
10.1145/3544549.3585811acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Work in Progress

Keep it simple? Evaluation of Transitions in Virtual Reality

Published:19 April 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

The impact of different transitions between two virtual reality (VR) environments is still an open research question, and related work often serves only an isolated view on different techniques, i.e., with low ecological validity. The purpose of this study was to start closing this gap and evaluate the impact of six transitions while the user is solving a task that keeps them engaged. Therefore, we first propose a suitable and reproducible task design. Then we evaluate the six transitions in a user study. The results show that in contrast to prior work, the users preferred a short and efficient transition against a transition that was designed to achieve higher interactivity and continuity but was perceived as more cumbersome to use.

Footnotes

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

3544549.3585811-video-preview.mp4

mp4

7.9 MB

3544549.3585811-talk-video.mp4

mp4

40.1 MB

References

  1. Mark Billinghurst, Hirokazu Kato, and Ivan Poupyrev. 2001. MagicBook: Transitioning between Reality and Virtuality. In CHI EA ’01: Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 25–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/634067.634087Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. John Brooke. 1996. SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry 189 (1996), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1249/00005768-198205000-00012Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Neat Corporation. accessed 02.03.2023. Budget Cuts. http://www.neatcorporation.com/BudgetCuts/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Crows Crows Crows. accessed 01.03.2023. Accounting (Legacy). https://store.steampowered.com/app/518580/Accounting_Legacy/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. James Cutting, Kaitlin Brunick, and Jordan Delong. 2011. The Changing Poetics of the Dissolve in Hollywood Film. Empirical Studies of the Arts 29 (2011), 149–169. https://doi.org/10.2190/EM.29.2.bGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Sebastian Freitag, Dominik Rausch, and Torsten Kuhlen. 2014. Reorientation in virtual environments using interactive portals. 3DUI ’14: Proceedings of the 9th Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (2014), 119–122. https://doi.org/10.1109/3DUI.2014.6798852Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. Google. accessed 01.03.2023. Google Earth VR. https://store.steampowered.com/app/348250/Google_Earth_VR/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Raphael Grasset, Alessandro Mulloni, Mark Billinghurst, and Dieter Schmalstieg. 2011. Handbook of Augmented Reality. Springer New York, Chapter Navigation Techniques in Augmented and Mixed Reality: Crossing the Virtuality Continuum, 379–407. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0064-6_18Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. Advances in Psychology 52 (1988), 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Robin Horst, Ramtin Naraghi-Taghi-Off, Linda Rau, and Ralf Dörner. 2021. Back to reality: transition techniques from short HMD-based virtual experiences to the physical world. Multimedia Tools and Applications 80 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11317-wGoogle ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Malte Husung and Eike Langbehn. 2019. Of Portals and Orbs: An Evaluation of Scene Transition Techniques for Virtual Reality. In MuC ’09: Proceedings of the 19th Mensch und Computer. 245–254. https://doi.org/10.1145/3340764.3340779Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Steven Douglas Katz. 1991. Film directing shot by shot: visualizing from concept to screen. Gulf Professional Publishing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Behrang Keshavarz and Heiko Hecht. 2011. Validating an Efficient Method to Quantify Motion Sickness. Human Factors 53 (2011), 415–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811403736Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. André Kunert, Alexander Kulik, Stephan Beck, and Bernd Froehlich. 2014. Photoportals: Shared References in Space and Time. In CSCW ’14: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing. 1388–1399. https://doi.org/10.1145/2531602.2531727Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Theodoros Kyriazos, Anastassios Stalikas, Konstantina Prassa, Michael Galanakis, Katerina Flora, and Varvara Chatzilia. 2018. The Flow Short Scale (FSS) Dimensionality and What MIMIC Shows on Heterogeneity and Invariance. Psychology 09 (2018), 1357–1382. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2018.96083Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Prism Game Studios Ltd.accessed 01.03.2023. Portal Stories: VR. https://store.steampowered.com/app/446750/Portal_Stories_VR/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. F. Pointecker, J. Friedl, D. Schwajda, H. Jetter, and C. Anthes. 2022. Bridging the Gap Across Realities: Visual Transitions Between Virtual and Augmented Reality. In ISMAR ’22: Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality. 827–836. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR55827.2022.00101Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. F. Rheinberg, S. Engeser, and R. Vollmeyer. 2002. Measuring components of flow: the Flow-Short-Scale. In Proceedings of the 1st International Positive Psychology Summit. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4417.2243Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Yeon Soon Shin, Rolando Masís-Obando, Neggin Keshavarzian, Riya Dáve, and Kenneth A. Norman. 2021. Context-dependent memory effects in two immersive virtual reality environments: On Mars and underwater. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 28 (2021), 574–582. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01835-3Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Mel Slater. 2004. How Colorful Was Your Day? Why Questionnaires Cannot Assess Presence in Virtual Environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments 13 (2004), 484–493. https://doi.org/10.1162/1054746041944849Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Lightspeed Studios. accessed 04.01.2023. NVIDIA VR Funhouse. https://store.steampowered.com/app/468700/NVIDIA_VR_Funhouse/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Valve. accessed 01.03.2023. The Lab. https://store.steampowered.com/app/450390/The_Lab/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Daniel Zielasko, Nico Feld, Carlo Flemming, Philip Lungershausen, Andreas Morgenthal, Sascha D. Schmitz, Torsten Mattern, and Benjamin Weyers. 2020. Towards Preservation and Availability of Heterogeneous Cultural Heritage Research Data via a Virtual Museum. In VRAR ’20: Proceedings of the 1st GI VR / AR Workshop. https://doi.org/10.18420/vrar2020_6Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Keep it simple? Evaluation of Transitions in Virtual Reality

        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 Conferences
          CHI EA '23: Extended Abstracts of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
          April 2023
          3914 pages
          ISBN:9781450394222
          DOI:10.1145/3544549

          Copyright © 2023 Owner/Author

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 19 April 2023

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • Work in Progress
          • Research
          • Refereed limited

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Full Text

        View this article in Full Text.

        View Full Text

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format