Journal of the Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회지)

Ergonomics Society of Korea (대한인간공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Investigating Key User Experience Factors for Virtual Reality Interactions

  • Ahn, Junyoung (Hongik University, Department of Industrial Engineering) ;
  • Choi, Seungho (Hongik University, Department of Industrial Engineering) ;
  • Lee, Minjae (Hongik University, Department of Industrial Engineering) ;
  • Kim, Kyungdoh (Hongik University, Department of Industrial Engineering)
  • Received : 2017.01.11
  • Accepted : 2017.06.09
  • Published : 2017.08.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to investigate key user experience factors of interactions for Head Mounted Display (HMD) devices in the Virtual Reality Environment (VRE). Background: Virtual reality interaction research has been conducted steadily, while interaction methods and virtual reality devices have improved. Recently, all of the virtual reality devices are head mounted display based ones. Also, HMD-based interaction types include Remote Controller, Head Tracking, and Hand Gesture. However, there is few study on usability evaluation of virtual reality. Especially, the usability of HMD-based virtual reality was not investigated. Therefore, it is necessary to study the usability of HMD-based virtual reality. Method: HMD-based VR devices released recently have only three interaction types, 'Remote Controller', 'Head Tracking', and 'Hand Gesture'. We search 113 types of research to check the user experience factors or evaluation scales by interaction type. Finally, the key user experience factors or relevant evaluation scales are summarized considering the frequency used in the studies. Results: There are various key user experience factors by each interaction type. First, Remote controller's key user experience factors are 'Ease of learning', 'Ease of use', 'Satisfaction', 'Effectiveness', and 'Efficiency'. Also, Head tracking's key user experience factors are 'Sickness', 'Immersion', 'Intuitiveness', 'Stress', 'Fatigue', and 'Ease of learning'. Finally, Hand gesture's key user experience factors are 'Ease of learning', 'Ease of use', 'Feedback', 'Consistent', 'Simple', 'Natural', 'Efficiency', 'Responsiveness', 'Usefulness', 'Intuitiveness', and 'Adaptability'. Conclusion: We identified key user experience factors for each interaction type through literature review. However, we did not consider objective measures because each study adopted different performance factors. Application: The results of this study can be used when evaluating HMD-based interactions in virtual reality in terms of usability.

Keywords

References

  1. Argyros, A. and Lourakis, M., Vision-based interpretation of hand gestures for remote control of a computer mouse. Computer Vision in Human-Computer Interaction, 40-51, 2006.
  2. Baudel, T. and Beaudouin-Lafon, M., Charade: remote control of objects using free-hand gestures, Communications of the ACM, 36(7), 28-35, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1145/159544.159562
  3. Biocca, F., Communication within virtual reality: Creating a space for research. Journal of Communication, 42(4), 5-22, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.1992.tb00810.x
  4. Boulay, M., Benveniste, S., Boespflug, S., Jouvelot, P. and Rigaud, A.S., A pilot usability study of MINWii, a music therapy game for demented patients. Technology and Health Care, 19(4), 233-246, 2011.
  5. Bowman, D.A., Interaction techniques for common tasks in immersive virtual environments, Diss. Georgia Institute of Technology, 1999.
  6. Bowman, D.A., Kruijff, E., LaViola Jr, J.J. and Poupyrev, I., An introduction to 3-D user interface design, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 10(1), 96-108, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474601750182342
  7. Brooke, J., SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale, Usability Evaluation in Industry, 189(194), 4-7, 1996.
  8. Brown, M., Kehoe, A., Kirakowski, J. and Pitt, I., Beyond the gamepad: HCI and game controller design and evaluation, In Game User Experience Evaluation, Springer International Publishing. 263-285, 2015.
  9. Bruck, S. and Watters, P.A., The factor structure of cybersickness. Displays, 32(4), 153-158, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2011.07.002
  10. Buxton, B. and Fitzmaurice, G.W., HMDs, caves & chameleon: a human-centric analysis of interaction in virtual space, ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics, 32(4), 69-74, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1145/307710.307732
  11. Castaneda, L. and Pacampara, M., Virtual Reality in the Classroom: An Exploration of Hardware, Management, Content and Pedagogy, In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 2016(1), 527-534, 2016.
  12. Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D.J., DeFanti, T.A., Kenyon, R.V. and Hart, J.C., The CAVE: Audio Visual Experience Automatic Virtual Environment, Communications of the ACM, 35(6), 64-73, 1992.
  13. Desai, P.R., Desai, P.N., Ajmera, K.D. and Mehta, K., A review paper on Oculus Rift - a virtual reality headset, International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology, 13(4), 175-179, 2014. https://doi.org/10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V13P237
  14. Fernandes, P., Ferreira, C., Cunha, A. and Morgado, L., Usability of 3D controllers in Second Life, DSAI, 25-26, 2010.
  15. Fitzmaurice, G.W., Situated information spaces and spatially aware palmtop computers, Communications of the ACM, 36(7), 39-49, 1993.
  16. Hart, S.G. and Staveland, L.E., Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research, Advances in Psychology, 52, 139-183, 1988.
  17. Howarth, P.A. and Costello, P.J., The occurrence of virtual simulation sickness symptoms when an HMD was used as a personal viewing system, Displays, 18(2), 107-116, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-9382(97)00011-5
  18. Howarth, P.A. and Istance, H.O., The association between visual discomfort and the use of visual display units. Behaviour & Information Technology, 4(2), 131-149, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1080/01449298508901794
  19. Jennett, C., Cox, A.L., Cairns, P., Dhoparee, S., Epps, A., Tijs, T. and Walton, A., Measuring and defining the experience of immersion in games. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 66(9), 641-661, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2008.04.004
  20. Kennedy, R.S., Lane, N.E., Berbaum, K.S. and Lilienthal, M.G., Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(3), 203-220, 1993. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3
  21. Kim, H., Albuquerque, G., Havemann, S. and Fellner, D.W., Tangible 3D: Hand Gesture Interaction for Immersive 3D Modeling, In IPT/EGVE, 191-199, 2005.
  22. Kim, K., Proctor, R.W. and Salvendy, G., The relation between usability and product success in cell phones, Behaviour & Information Technology, 31(10), 969-982, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2011.596997
  23. Kim, Y.Y., Kim, H.J., Kim, E.N., Ko, H.D. and Kim, H.T., Characteristic changes in the physiological components of cybersickness. Psychophysiology, 42(5), 616-625, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00349.x
  24. Kjeldskov, J., Interaction: Full and partial immersive virtual reality displays, IRIS24, 587-600, 2001.
  25. Krum, D.M., Omoteso, O., Ribarsky, W., Starner, T. and Hodges, L.F., Speech and gesture multimodal control of a whole Earth 3D visualization environment, 2002.
  26. Kurniawan, S., King, A., Evans, D.G. and Blenkhorn, P., Design and user evaluation of a joystick-operated full-screen magnifier, In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ACM, 25-32, 2003.
  27. Lindstrom, P., Koller, D., Ribarsky, W., Hodges, L.F., Op den Bosch, A. and Faust, N.L., An integrated global GIS and visual simulation system, 1997.
  28. Martel, E., Hassan, A., Su, F., Girouard, A., Gerroir, J. and Muldner, K., Diving Head-First into Virtual Reality-Evaluating HMD Control Schemes for VR Games, cil.csit.carleton.ca, http://cil.csit.carleton.ca/wordpress/wp-content/papers/FDG2015.Martel.HMD-VR.pdf (retrieved November 25, 2016).
  29. McMahan, R.P., Alon, A.J.D., Lazem, S., Beaton, R.J., Machaj, D., Schaefer, M., Silva, M.G., Leal, A., Hagan, R. and Bowman, D.A., Evaluating natural interaction techniques in video games, In 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), 2010 IEEE Symposium, 11-14, 2010.
  30. McNamara, N. and Kirakowski, J., Functionality, usability, and user experience: three areas of concern, interactions, 13(6), 26-28, 2006.
  31. Moeslund, T.B., Interacting with a virtual world through motion capture, Virtual interaction: interaction in virtual inhabited 3D worlds, Springer, 2001.
  32. Moon, J.S., The study on the applicability of virtual reality headset to space design field through focus group interviews, Journal of Integrated Design Research, 13(1), 33-44, 2014.
  33. Mourant, R.R. and Jaeger, B.K., Dynamic evaluation of pre-entry HOV signage using a virtual environments driving simulator, et. al. Vision in Vehicles VIII Elseiver Science BV NorthHolland, 2000.
  34. Murthy, G.R.S. and Jadon, R.S., A review of vision based hand gestures recognition, International Journal of Information Technology and Knowledge Management, 2(2), 405-410, 2009.
  35. Pal, S.K., Khan, M. and McMahan, R.P., The benefits of rotational head tracking, 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), 31-38, IEEE, 2016.
  36. Poupyrev, I., Billinghurst, M., Weghorst, S. and Ichikawa, T., The go-go interaction technique: non-linear mapping for direct manipulation in VR, Proceedings of the 9th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, 79-80, 1996.
  37. Ragan, E.D., Scerbo, S., Bacim, F. and Bowman, D.A, Amplified Head Rotation in Virtual Reality and the Effects on 3D Search, Training Transfer, and Spatial Orientation, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 2016.
  38. Rebelo, F., Noriega, P., Duarte, E. and Soares, M., Using virtual reality to assess user experience, Human Factors, 54(6), 964-982, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812465006
  39. Rhee, B.A. and Kim, J.S., The sutability of VR artwork as an immersive learning tool, Proceedings of the Korean Society of Computer Information Conference, 24(1), 223-226, 2016.
  40. Rupp, M.A., Oppold, P. and McConnell, D.S., Comparing the Performance, Workload, and Usability of a Gamepad and Joystick in a Complex Task, In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, SAGE Publications, 57(1), 1775-1779, 2013.
  41. Schuemie, M.J., Van Der Straaten, P., Krijn, M. and Van Der Mast, C.A., Research on presence in virtual reality: A survey, Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 4(2), 183-201, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1089/109493101300117884
  42. Shneiderman, B., Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd ed., McGraw-Hill, 1998.
  43. Slater, M., Usoh, M. and Steed, A., Taking steps: the influence of a walking technique on presence in virtual reality, ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI), 2(3), 201-219, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1145/210079.210084
  44. Song, P., Goh, W.B., Hutama, W., Fu, C.W. and Liu, X., A handle bar metaphor for virtual object manipulation with mid-air interaction, In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1297-1306, 2012.
  45. Stanney, K.M., Mourant, R.R. and Kennedy, R.S., Human factors issues in virtual environments: A review of the literature, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(4), 327-351, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474698565767
  46. Sutherland, I.E., A head-mounted three dimensional display, In Proceedings of the December 9-11, 1968, fall joint computer conference, part I, 757-764, 1968.
  47. Sutherland, I.E., The ultimate display, Multimedia: From Wagner to virtual reality, 1965.
  48. Van Nieuwenhuizen, K., Schaap, G.J. and Hurst, W., 3D HMD Image Browsers: Optimal User Placement and Exploration Mechanisms, johnnyschaap.com, http://www.johnnyschaap.com/files/3D%20HMD%20Image%20Browsers%20Optimal%20User%20Placement% 20and%20Exploration.pdf (retrieved November 23, 2016).
  49. Wachs, J.P., Kölsch, M., Stern, H. and Edan, Y., Vision-based hand-gesture applications. Communications of the ACM, 54(2), 60-71, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1145/1897816.1897838
  50. Wang, R., Mihailidis, A., Dutta, T. and Fernie, G., Usability testing of multimodal feedback interface and simulated collisionavoidance power wheelchair for long-term-care home residents with cognitive impairments. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development, 48(7), 801, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1682/JRRD.2010.08.0147
  51. Welch, R.B., Blackmon, T.T., Liu, A., Mellers, B.A. and Stark, L.W., The effects of pictorial realism, delay of visual feedback, and observer interactivity on the subjective sense of presence, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5(3), 263-273, 1996. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1996.5.3.263
  52. Yang, U. and Kim, G.J., Implementation and evaluation of "just follow me": An immersive, VR-based, motion-training system, Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 11(3), 304-323, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474602317473240
  53. Yano, Y., Kiyokawa, K., Sherstyuk, A., Mashita, T. and Takemura, H., Investigation of dynamic view expansion for head-mounted displays with head tracking in virtual environments, Proc. of the 24rd International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence (ICAT 2014), 2014.