Cubes in the Cube: A Comparison of a Puzzle-Solving Task in a Virtual and a Real Environment

Abstract

In this study we compared collaboration on a puzzle-solving task carried out by two persons in a virtual and a real environment. The task, putting together a cube consisting of different colored blocks in a "Rubiks" cube-type puzzle, was performed both in a shared virtual environment (VE) setting, using a Cave-type virtual reality (VR) system networked with a desktop VR system, and with cardboard colored blocks in an equivalent real setting. The aims of the study were to investigate presence, co-presence, collaboration, leadership, and performance in the two settings. We found that the participants contributed unequally to the task in the VE, and also found differences in collaboration between the virtual and the real setting.

Experience of Presence in Virtual Environments

“…The questionnaire developed by Axelsson et al has also been used in three studies. In this case, the two studies that had participants perform very different types of tasks, although using similar VE interfaces, both found a significant correlation between collaboration and co-presence, see (Axelsson et al, 2001(Axelsson et al, , 1999. Findings for immersion, however, were inconsistent between the studies, see also .…”

“…(2000) 6 items addressing whether a participant had a sense of being with his partner and how having a partner affected the sense of presence, including the effect of controlling navigation and interaction 2 Bystrom (19992 Bystrom ( , 1996 6 items addressing whether a participant had a sense of being in the same place as another, the emergence of a group/community, and a sense or memory of collaborating with real people rather than a computer or robot Yes 4 Casanueva (2001) Items addressing the sense of being in the same room with a partner, and being together No 2 Romano (1998), Whitelock (2000) 2 items based on how much a participant had a sense of being in the same room as objects No 1 Schroeder (2001) 3 items addressing the sense of being together with other people, being able to subsequently imagine being with other people in the virtual scene, and similarity of experience to experiences in the real world Yes 2 Slater (2000b 8 items addressing the sense of being with other people, working with people rather than a computer, similarity to real experiences, and sense of other humans interacting with the participant Yes 1 2 items addressing the sense of being in the same room with a partner Yes 1 All items related to co-presence use a semantic differential technique with bi-polar anchors, although there is some difference in how co-presence measures are computed. (Axelsson et al, 2001(Axelsson et al, , 1999 simply sum the ratings across their two items.…”

“…This serves to illustrate how consideration of particular characteristics can allow better comparison of results across studies. In two studies, Axelsson et al (2001; found a significant correlation between presence and co-presence when a Cave-type projection screen display was used that was not present when desktop monitors were used to display the virtual world. Bystrom (1999), Casaneuva (2001 in four separate studies, and Tromp et al (1998) also found no relationship between presence and co-presence when desktop monitors were used for the visual display.…”

Contributions to the Development of Objective Techniques for Presence Measurement in Virtual Environments by means of Brain Activity Analysis

“…In a study from Axelsson et al [25], the sense of presence in a CAVElike system was compared to the sense of presence a desktop VR system. The task that the 44 users that participated in the experience had to perform was to solve a 3D puzzle together.…”

“…Both immersion and navigation are factors that have been studied as causes of presence [25,27,26,28]. The observed trend may show that environments with high immersion or a self-controlled navigation can mask the influence of other factors.…”