The Spatial Presence Experience Scale (SPES)

Hartmann, Tilo; Wirth, Werner; Schramm, Holger; Klimmt, Christoph; Vorderer, Peter; Gysbers, André; Böcking, Saskia; Ravaja, Niklas; Laarni, Jari; Saari, Timo; Gouveia, Feliz Ribeiro; Sacau, Ana

doi:10.1027/1864-1105/a000137

Cited by 184 publications

(107 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistent with some of the previous literature, that makes use of desktop systems, differences in self-reported imagery ability were found to be related to spatial presence (e.g. Hartmann et al 2016). The better the reported imagery ability the more spatially present participants felt.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

“…The results were consistent across both scenarios indicating that they generalise across at least these two different experiences. That the relationships identified were also consistent with findings using desktop systems (Hartmann et al 2016) and the process model in general (Wirth et al 2007) adds further support to the possibility that the results reported here are unlikely to be environment specific. Instead, it appears to be the case that there is something special about selfreports of imagery and spatial presence which is distinct from at least some traditional tests of spatial ability.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…The evidence thus far has failed to find a relationship when using more perceptually immersive systems. This is contrary to the assumptions of the process model of spatial presence (Wirth et al 2007) and is seemingly inconsistent with the evidence available using some desktop systems (Hofer et al 2012;Hartmann et al 2016). …”

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 76%

“…Consistent with the process model (Wirth et al 2007) imagery was related to the construction of a 'spatial situation model' which in turn was related to spatial presence. Hartmann et al (2016) report similar data in a validation study for a shortened measure of spatial presence. In this case, direct correlations are reported between imagery and presence.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Thus far, the available evidence has only ever reported a relationship between spatial presence and selfreports of imagery (Hartmann et al 2016), and never with more objective tests (Alsina-Jurnet & Gutiérrez-Maldonado 2010; Ling et al 2013). As noted in the introduction, this has been confounded by the use of desktop systems with self-report measures, and HMDs with ability tests.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Individual differences in virtual reality: Are spatial presence and spatial ability linked?

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:One aim of virtual reality technology is to immerse the user in a digital environment that is distinct from physical reality. Feeling spatially located in this digital environment is central to the experience, and is more formally known as spatial presence. Experiences of spatial presence differ between individuals; prominent theories assume that these differences may, in part, be explained by differences in more general spatial abilities.Whilst there is some support for this claim with desktop systems there is currently no direct empirical evidence to support this with more immersive technologies such as Head Mounted Displays (HMDs). In this study participants completed three different measures of spatial ability before experiencing two virtual environments. These measures included: a self-report of visuospatial imagery; the mental rotations test; and a test of topographical memory. After completing the measures, participants briefly experienced a virtual city and a virtual train ride through a HMD. The user's head movements were tracked and visual displays were updated to give the sense of a full 360 o environment. After each experience the participants reported how present they felt and the extent to which they had a mental model of the environment. Self-reports of imagery were positively correlated with reports of spatial presence, consistent with previous literature. However, spatial presence was not related to performance on either of the more objective tests. Whilst this provides confirmatory evidence that self-reports of imagery can predict presence it is still unclear which more basic spatial abilities, if any, could underlie this relationship.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

Section: Introductioncontrasting

confidence: 76%

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 53%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Individual differences in virtual reality: Are spatial presence and spatial ability linked?

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Validity

Burridge¹,

Lynch²

2020

The International Encyclopedia of Media Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Validity presents two factors of concern for media psychologists. Methodological validity is the likelihood that a particular approach can answer a research question accurately and thoroughly. It is a factor in the design of both qualitative and quantitative research studies, although distinct criteria for its establishment exist within each approach (i.e., credibility and transferability for qualitative researchers; internal and external validity for quantitative researchers). Measurement validity is the degree to which measures accurately capture the concept a researcher proposes to observe. This factor is represented through a variety of dimensions, some primarily established through logic (i.e., face, content, criterion, and nomological validity) and others additionally through statistical analyses (i.e., convergent, discriminant, concurrent, and predictive validity).

show abstract

Strategic use of immersive media and narrative message in virtual marketing: Understanding the roles of telepresence and transportation

Chen

Yao

2021

Psychology and Marketing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study differentiates the roles of telepresence and transportation, the two widely cited processes underpinning an immersive media viewing experience, in the context of virtual marketing. In Study 1, college students viewed a real estate property tour in virtual reality (VR; high immersion) or as a 360° video (low immersion) in a research lab. The tour was accompanied by a voiceover presenting descriptive information about the apartment (descriptive evidence) or a narrative‐based introduction (narrative evidence). We found the enhanced telepresence under the VR viewing condition negatively impacted users' memory of the property; this effect was particularly pronounced with the narrative voiceover. Study 2 replicated key findings from Study 1 in an online experiment with a larger and more diverse sample. We also found that narrative‐induced transportation strengthened attitudinal outcomes, and enhanced telepresence boosted this effect. Our studies disentangle the impacts of VR‐induced telepresence on cognitive processing from the effects of narrative‐induced transportation on persuasive outcomes. The highly immersive media experience combined with deep transportation into the narrative can strengthen viewers' positive attitude towards the overall experience but hinder their ability to remember the details of the content. The findings point to a medium‐message matching strategy to achieve marketing goals.

show abstract

The Spatial Presence Experience Scale (SPES)

Cited by 184 publications

References 64 publications

Individual differences in virtual reality: Are spatial presence and spatial ability linked?

Individual differences in virtual reality: Are spatial presence and spatial ability linked?

Validity

Strategic use of immersive media and narrative message in virtual marketing: Understanding the roles of telepresence and transportation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About