In this paper, we describe a user study comparing five different locomotion interfaces for virtual reality locomotion. We compared a standard non-motion cueing interface, Joystick (Xbox), with four motion cueing interfaces, NaviChair (stool with springs), MuvMan (sit/stand active stool), Head-Directed (Oculus Rift DK2), and Swivel Chair (everyday office chair with leaning capability). Each interface had two degrees of freedom to move forward/backward and rotate using velocity (rate) control. The aim of this mixed methods study was to better understand relevant user experience factors and guide the design of future locomotion interfaces. This study employed methods from HCI to provide an understanding of why users behave a certain way while using the interface and to unearth any new issues with the design. Participants were tasked to search for objects in a virtual city while they provided talk-aloud feedback and we logged their behaviour. Subsequently, they completed a post-experimental questionnaire on their experience. We found that the qualitative themes of control, usability, and experience echoed the results of the questionnaire, providing internal validity. The quantitative measures revealed the Joystick to be significantly more comfortable and precise than the motion cueing interfaces. However, the qualitative feedback and interviews showed this was due to the reduced perceived controllability and safety of the motion cueing interfaces. Designers of these interfaces should consider using a backrest if users need to lean backwards and avoid using velocity-control for rotations when using HMDs.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

This research aims to investigate if using a more embodied interface that includes motion cueing can facilitate spatial updating compared to a more traditional non-embodied interface. The ultimate goal is to create a simple, elegant, and effective selfmotion control interface. Using a pointing task, we quantify spatial updating in terms of mean pointing error to determine how two modes of locomotion compare: user powered motion cueing (use your body to swivel and tilt a joystick-like interface) and nomotion cueing (traditional joystick). Because the user-powered chair is a more embodied interface providing some minimal motion cueing, we hypothesized it should more effectively support spatial updating and, thus, increase task performance. Results showed, however, the user-powered chair did not significantly improve mean pointing performance in a virtual spatial orientation task (i.e., knowing where users are looking in the VE). Exit interviews revealed the control mechanism for the user-powered chair was not as accurate or easy to use as the joystick, although many felt more immersed. We discuss how user feedback can guide the design of more effective user-powered motion cueing to overcome usability issues and realize benefits of motion cueing.