Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices
Immersive virtual environments (VEs) have the potential to provide novel cost effective ways for evaluating not only new environments and usability scenarios, but also potential user experiences. To achieve this, VEs must be adequately realistic. The level of perceived authenticity can be ascertaine...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2016-01-01
|
| Series: | Advances in Human-Computer Interaction |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2937632 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1841524626982699008 |
|---|---|
| author | Aila Kronqvist Jussi Jokinen Rebekah Rousi |
| author_facet | Aila Kronqvist Jussi Jokinen Rebekah Rousi |
| author_sort | Aila Kronqvist |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Immersive virtual environments (VEs) have the potential to provide novel cost effective ways for evaluating not only new environments and usability scenarios, but also potential user experiences. To achieve this, VEs must be adequately realistic. The level of perceived authenticity can be ascertained by measuring the levels of immersion people experience in their VE interactions. In this paper the degree of authenticity is measured via an authenticity index in relation to three different immersive virtual environment devices. These devices include (1) a headband, (2) 3D glasses, and (3) a head-mounted display (HMD). A quick scale for measuring immersion, feeling of control, and simulator sickness was developed and tested. The HMD proved to be the most immersive device, although the headband was demonstrated as being a more stable environment causing the least simulator sickness. The results have design implication as they provide insight into specific factors which make experience in a VE seem more authentic to users. The paper emphasizes that, in addition to the quality of the VE, focus needs to be placed on ergonomic factors such as the weight of the devices, as these may compromise the quality of results obtained when examining studying human-technology interaction in a VE. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-62beb312cd9c4a77851c61120f4490f4 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 1687-5893 1687-5907 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2016-01-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Advances in Human-Computer Interaction |
| spelling | doaj-art-62beb312cd9c4a77851c61120f4490f42025-02-03T05:47:43ZengWileyAdvances in Human-Computer Interaction1687-58931687-59072016-01-01201610.1155/2016/29376322937632Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three DevicesAila Kronqvist0Jussi Jokinen1Rebekah Rousi2University of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, 40014 University of Jyväskylä, FinlandAalto University, 02150 Espoo, FinlandUniversity of Jyväskylä, P.O. Box 35, 40014 University of Jyväskylä, FinlandImmersive virtual environments (VEs) have the potential to provide novel cost effective ways for evaluating not only new environments and usability scenarios, but also potential user experiences. To achieve this, VEs must be adequately realistic. The level of perceived authenticity can be ascertained by measuring the levels of immersion people experience in their VE interactions. In this paper the degree of authenticity is measured via an authenticity index in relation to three different immersive virtual environment devices. These devices include (1) a headband, (2) 3D glasses, and (3) a head-mounted display (HMD). A quick scale for measuring immersion, feeling of control, and simulator sickness was developed and tested. The HMD proved to be the most immersive device, although the headband was demonstrated as being a more stable environment causing the least simulator sickness. The results have design implication as they provide insight into specific factors which make experience in a VE seem more authentic to users. The paper emphasizes that, in addition to the quality of the VE, focus needs to be placed on ergonomic factors such as the weight of the devices, as these may compromise the quality of results obtained when examining studying human-technology interaction in a VE.http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2937632 |
| spellingShingle | Aila Kronqvist Jussi Jokinen Rebekah Rousi Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices Advances in Human-Computer Interaction |
| title | Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices |
| title_full | Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices |
| title_fullStr | Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices |
| title_full_unstemmed | Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices |
| title_short | Evaluating the Authenticity of Virtual Environments: Comparison of Three Devices |
| title_sort | evaluating the authenticity of virtual environments comparison of three devices |
| url | http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/2937632 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT ailakronqvist evaluatingtheauthenticityofvirtualenvironmentscomparisonofthreedevices AT jussijokinen evaluatingtheauthenticityofvirtualenvironmentscomparisonofthreedevices AT rebekahrousi evaluatingtheauthenticityofvirtualenvironmentscomparisonofthreedevices |