Developing and Evaluating VR Field Trips

Oprean, Danielle; Wallgrün, Jan Oliver; Duarte, José Pinto; Verniz, Debora; Zhao, Jiayan; Klippel, Alexander

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-63946-8_22

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To illustrate a simple example, Fig. 7.15 shows three experimental setups that were used in a recent study on how different levels of immersion influence the feeling of being present in a remote meeting (Oprean et al 2018).…”

Section: Essential Concepts For Immersive Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geospatial Information Visualization and Extended Reality Displays

Çöltekin

Griffin

Slingsby

et al. 2019

Manual of Digital Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this chapter, we review and summarize the current state of the art in geovisualization and extended reality (i.e., virtual, augmented and mixed reality), covering a wide range of approaches to these subjects in domains that are related to geographic information science. We introduce the relationship between geovisualization, extended reality and Digital Earth, provide some fundamental definitions of related terms, and discuss the introduced topics from a human-centric perspective. We describe related research areas including geovisual analytics and movement visualization, both of which have attracted wide interest from multidisciplinary communities in recent years. The last few sections describe the current progress in the

show abstract

Section: Essential Concepts For Immersive Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Geospatial Information Visualization and Extended Reality Displays

Çöltekin

Griffin

Slingsby

et al. 2019

Manual of Digital Earth

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Figure 4(a) shows a VR site experience of the Santa Marta informal settlement in Rio, Brazil, that we developed for mobile devices in combination with the Google Cardboard as well as for the HTC Vive to conduct a study with students in a joint architecture and landscape architecture studio course (Oprean, 2018). The experience has been built entirely from 360° image and video material collected at the site.…”

Section: Vr Site Experience Of An Informal Settlement In Riomentioning

confidence: 99%

A Framework for Low-Cost Multi-Platform Vr and Ar Site Experiences

Wallgrün

Huang

Zhao

et al. 2017

Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:Low-cost consumer-level immersive solutions have the potential to revolutionize education and research in many fields by providing virtual experiences of sites that are either inaccessible, too dangerous, or too expensive to visit, or by augmenting in-situ experiences using augmented and mixed reality methods. We present our approach for creating low-cost multi-platform virtual and augmented reality site experiences of real world places for education and research purposes, making extensive use of Structure-from-Motion methods as well as 360° photography and videography. We discuss several example projects, for the Mayan City of Cahal Pech, Iceland's Thrihnukar volcano, the Santa Marta informal settlement in Rio, and for the Penn State Campus, and we propose a framework for creating and maintaining such applications by combining declarative content specification methods with a central linked-data based spatio-temporal information system.

show abstract

“…Most scientific papers on virtual tours do not directly ad dress the comparison of the platforms as they focus either on isolated usability evaluation, like Osman et al (2009) and Oprean et al (2018), or application development, like Sathe et al (2017), Butcher andRitsos (2017), andYe et al (2017). Moreover, the most significant studies on this subject per formed by Lee et al (2013) and Klippel et al (2019) address, respectively, the comparison of different visualization modes using tablets in a tour and the comparison of real field trips and virtual ones, but neither contrasts different devices.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Virtual look around: comparing presence, cybersickness and usability for virtual tours across different devices

Cheiran

Rodrigues

Pimenta

2021

JIS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Virtual Reality has become readily available in the last few years through different devices, from desktop computers to head-mounted displays (HMD). Also, virtual tours became popular with 360º panoramic photographs and video clips on online social media, so people could visit remote locations without being exposed to crowded transportation or long travels. Also, virtual tours demonstrate considerable potential as a form of escapism and even for remote teaching. Since we lack studies that evaluate the User Experience (UX) in virtual tours on different devices, this article aims to compare aspects of the User Experience (regarding sense of presence, cybersickness, and usability) in a virtual tour website developed in WebXR across different devices. To achieve our objective, we developed a virtual tour based on 360º pictures using WebXR API and React 360 framework and conducted an experiment with 41 undergraduate students using four different devices: a laptop computer, a smartphone, a Google Cardboard headset, and a Samsung Gear VR HMD. We evaluated users’ perceptions by adapting and translating the Suitability Evaluation Questionnaire (SEQ) and users’ performance by measuring the time to fulfill a set of tasks. The main findings from this study include that (i) the overall self-reported experience using Google Cardboard is worse than using other devices, (ii) the users’ performance is quite similar between the platforms, (iii) there is evidence of unexpected cybersickness symptoms in tests with the smartphone, and (iv) the development of a plausible hypothesis concerning low usability having an effect upon the sense of presence. Additional contributions of our research are the adaptation, translation into Portuguese, psychometric analysis, and revised scoring procedures of the SEQ.

show abstract

Developing and Evaluating VR Field Trips

Cited by 4 publications

References 6 publications

Geospatial Information Visualization and Extended Reality Displays

Geospatial Information Visualization and Extended Reality Displays

A Framework for Low-Cost Multi-Platform Vr and Ar Site Experiences

Virtual look around: comparing presence, cybersickness and usability for virtual tours across different devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About