Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]

skip to main content
10.1145/3552327.3552349acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecceConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

The right tools for the job: Towards preference and performance considerations in the design of Virtual Reality interactions

Published: 04 October 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) users interact with virtual objects using motion tracked controllers. While many devices utilize abstract button pushes for interactions, some allow for limited finger tracking by estimating finger positions based on sensors. In this study, Vive Wands and Valve Index controllers were compared in three tasks: direct interaction with objects (throwing), tool usage (bow), and indirect control of a character (remote-control). Forty-four participants completed each task with both devices and rated the usability of the device after each task. Results showed differences in preference only for the remote-control task. Some participants noted that using the thumbstick of the Index felt more natural in this task. However, performance did not differ between devices in any task. Future research should not only compare designs of controllers, but also consider assets and interactions, as there may be preference and performance differences for certain combinations.

References

[1]
John Brooke. 1996. SUS - A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. https://www.crcpress.com/product/isbn/9780748404605 ISBN: 9780748404605.
[2]
Lucio Tommaso de Paolis and Valerio de Luca. 2020. The impact of the input interface in a virtual environment: The Vive controller and the Myo armband. Virtual Reality 24, 3 (2020), 483–502. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-019-00409-6
[3]
F. Fahmi, K. Tanjung, F. Nainggolan, B. Siregar, N. Mubarakah, and M. Zarlis. 2020. Comparison study of user experience between virtual reality controllers, leap motion controllers, and senso glove for anatomy learning systems in a virtual reality environment. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 851 (2020), 012024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/851/1/012024
[4]
Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In Human Mental Workload. Advances in Psychology, Vol. 52. Elsevier, 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9
[5]
Yi-Jheng Huang, Kang-Yi Liu, Suiang-Shyan Lee, and I-Cheng Yeh. 2020. Evaluation of a Hybrid of Hand Gesture and Controller Inputs in Virtual Reality. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 37, 2 (Aug. 2020), 169–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2020.1809248
[6]
ISO 9241-11 2018. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction - Part 11: Usability: Definitions and Concepts. Standard. International Organization for Standardization.
[7]
ISO 9241-210 2019. Ergonomics of Human-System Interaction - Part 210: Human-Centred Design for Interactive Systems. Standard. International Organization for Standardization.
[8]
Jari Kangas, Sriram Kishore Kumar, Helena Mehtonen, Jorma Järnstedt, and Roope Raisamo. 2022. Trade-Off between Task Accuracy, Task Completion Time and Naturalness for Direct Object Manipulation in Virtual Reality. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 6, 1 (Jan. 2022), 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6010006
[9]
Robert S. Kennedy, Norman E. Lane, Kevin S. Berbaum, and Michael G. Lilienthal. 1993. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (1993), 203–220. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3
[10]
Behrang Keshavarz and Heiko Hecht. 2011. Validating an efficient method to quantify motion sickness. Human factors 53, 4 (2011), 415–426. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720811403736
[11]
Alexander Masurovsky, Paul Chojecki, Detlef Runde, Mustafa Lafci, David Przewozny, and Michael Gaebler. 2020. Controller-Free Hand Tracking for Grab-and-Place Tasks in Immersive Virtual Reality: Design Elements and Their Empirical Study. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 4, 4 (2020), 91. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti4040091
[12]
Ryan P. McMahan, Doug A. Bowman, David J. Zielinski, and Rachael B. Brady. 2012. Evaluating display fidelity and interaction fidelity in a virtual reality game. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 18, 4(2012), 626–633. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2012.43
[13]
Diego Monteiro, Hai-Ning Liang, Jialin Wang, Hao Chen, and Nilufar Baghaei. 112020. An In-Depth Exploration of the Effect of 2D/3D Views and Controller Types on First Person Shooter Games in Virtual Reality. In 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR). IEEE, 713–724. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISMAR50242.2020.00102
[14]
Vijayakumar Nanjappan, Hai-Ning Liang, Feiyu Lu, Konstantinos Papangelis, Yong Yue, and Ka Lok Man. 2018. User-elicited dual-hand interactions for manipulating 3D objects in virtual reality environments. Human-centric Computing and Information Sciences 8, 1 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13673-018-0154-5
[15]
R. C. Oldfield. 1971. The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9, 1 (1971), 97–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/0028-3932(71)90067-4
[16]
Duc-Minh Pham and Wolfgang Stuerzlinger. 11122019. Is the Pen Mightier than the Controller? A Comparison of Input Devices for Selection in Virtual and Augmented Reality. In 25th ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Tomas Trescak, Simeon Simoff, Deborah Richards, Anton Bogdanovych, Thierry Duval, Torsten Kuhlen, Huyen Nguyen, Shigeo Morishima, Yuichi Itoh, Richard Skarbez, and Martin Masek (Eds.). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3359996.3364264
[17]
R Core Team. 2019. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/
[18]
René Reinhard, Peter Mårdberg, Francisco García Rivera, Tobias Forsberg, Anton Berce, Mingji Fang, and Dan Högberg. 2020. The Use and Usage of Virtual Reality Technologies in Planning and Implementing New Workstations. In DHM2020. IOS Press, 388–397.
[19]
Nico Reski and Aris Alissandrakis. 2019. Open data exploration in virtual reality: a comparative study of input technology. Virtual Reality 24, 1 (Jan. 2019), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10055-019-00378-w
[20]
Michael A. Rupp, Paul Oppold, and Daniel S. McConnell. 2015. Evaluating input device usability as a function of task difficulty in a tracking task. Ergonomics 58, 5 (Jan. 2015), 722–735. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.988755
[21]
Thomas W. Schubert. 2003. The sense of presence in virtual environments. Zeitschrift für Medienpsychologie 15, 2 (2003), 69–71. https://doi.org/10.1026//1617-6383.15.2.69
[22]
Azmeh Shahid, Kate Wilkinson, Shai Marcu, and Colin M. Shapiro. 2012. Karolinska Sleepiness Scale (KSS). In STOP, THAT and One Hundred Other Sleep Scales, Azmeh Shahid, Kate Wilkinson, Shai Marcu, and Colin M. Shapiro (Eds.). Springer New York, New York, NY, 209–210. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-9893-4_47
[23]
David Zielinski, Brendan Macdonald, and Regis Kopper. 29.03.2014 - 02.04.2014. Comparative study of input devices for a VR mine simulation. In 2014 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR). IEEE, 125–126. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2014.6802083

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Keep Your Eyes on the Target: Enhancing Immersion and Usability by Designing Natural Object Throwing with Gaze-based TargetingProceedings of the 2024 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications10.1145/3649902.3653338(1-7)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2024
  • (2023)Don’t Drop the Ball: A Comparison of Throwing Performance Between VR and Real LifeProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting10.1177/2169506723119265967:1(1686-1692)Online publication date: 5-Dec-2023

Index Terms

  1. The right tools for the job: Towards preference and performance considerations in the design of Virtual Reality interactions

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Other conferences
    ECCE '22: Proceedings of the 33rd European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics
    October 2022
    183 pages
    ISBN:9781450398084
    DOI:10.1145/3552327
    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 the author(s) 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: 04 October 2022

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. Ergonomics
    2. Interaction
    3. Usability
    4. User Experience
    5. Virtual Reality

    Qualifiers

    • Short-paper
    • Research
    • Refereed limited

    Conference

    ECCE 2022
    ECCE 2022: 33rd European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics
    October 4 - 7, 2022
    Kaiserslautern, Germany

    Acceptance Rates

    Overall Acceptance Rate 56 of 91 submissions, 62%

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)45
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)7
    Reflects downloads up to 17 Feb 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)Keep Your Eyes on the Target: Enhancing Immersion and Usability by Designing Natural Object Throwing with Gaze-based TargetingProceedings of the 2024 Symposium on Eye Tracking Research and Applications10.1145/3649902.3653338(1-7)Online publication date: 4-Jun-2024
    • (2023)Don’t Drop the Ball: A Comparison of Throwing Performance Between VR and Real LifeProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting10.1177/2169506723119265967:1(1686-1692)Online publication date: 5-Dec-2023

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    HTML Format

    View this article in HTML Format.

    HTML Format

    Figures

    Tables

    Media

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media