A Comparison of Desktop and Augmented Reality Scenario Based Training Authoring Tools

González, Andrés N. Vargas; Kapalo, Katelynn A.; Koh, Senglee; Sottilare, Robert A.; Garrity, Pat; LaViola, Joseph J.

doi:10.1109/vr.2019.8797973

Cited by 16 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A chi-square goodness-of-fit test was performed to determine whether the proportion of the observed number of subjects choosing a condition was equal to a group with proportions equally distributed. The proportion of subjects' preference did differ by task 1, χ 2 (2, 21) = 8, p < 0.019. The proportion of subjects choosing a condition did not differ by tasks 2, 3 and 4.…”

Section: Preferencementioning

confidence: 91%

“…In situ authoring tools are situated in the context of procedural instructions. In the work by Gonzalez et al [2], a visual authoring tool is presented to add behaviors and interactions to virtual objects in a scene. The behaviors authored in this tool are descriptive (text or audio).…”

Section: Augmented Reality Authoring Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a given scenario, virtual objects possess attributes and behaviors that can infer some kind of instruction in the scene, such as in [2,3] in the form of audio and visual cues. Conversely, some objects demand more complex actions, such as rotating a knob or pressing a button, as in [4]; opening doors or compartments, as in the examples in [5]; or even deforming the geometries of objects, like the spring scenario from [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As such, they have difficulty in authoring a representative simulation with ease. This is further complicated as the means of interaction used are diverse across conditions, such as desktop [2,[7][8][9], virtual reality (VR) [3,[10][11][12], augmented reality (AR) [2,6,[13][14][15] and even combined approaches, as in [16], using desktop and VR together, or in [17], with simulated AR and VR.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Authoring Moving Parts of Objects in AR, VR and the Desktop

Vargas González,

Williamson,

LaViola

2023

MTI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Creating digital twins of real objects is becoming more popular, with smartphones providing 3D scanning capabilities. Adding semantics to the reconstructed virtual objects is important to possibly reproduce training scenarios that otherwise could demand significant resources or happen in dangerous scenarios in some cases. The aim of this work is to evaluate the usability of authoring object component behaviors in immersive and non-immersive approaches. Therefore, we present an evaluation of the perceived ease of use to author moving parts of objects under three different conditions: desktop, augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR). This paper provides insights into the perceived benefits and issues that domain experts might encounter when authoring geometrical component behaviors across each interface. A within-subject study is the major contribution of this work, from which is presented an analysis based on the usability, workload and user interface preferences of participants in the study. To reduce confounding variables in the study, we ensured that the virtual objects and the environment used for the evaluation were digital twins of the real objects and the environment that the experiment took place in. Results show that the desktop interface was perceived as more efficient and easier to use based on usability and workload measures. The desktop was preferred for performing component selection but no difference was found in the preference for defining a behavior and visualizing it. Based on these results, a set of recommendations and future directions are provided to achieve a more usable, immersive authoring experience.

show abstract

Section: Preferencementioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Augmented Reality Authoring Toolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Authoring Moving Parts of Objects in AR, VR and the Desktop

Vargas González,

Williamson,

LaViola

2023

MTI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is in part due to the rise of Microsoft HoloLens, which provides support for gesture recognition, reasonable accurate tracking, and graphics of an acceptable quality, despite still suffering from field-ofview limitations. González et al (2019) evaluated participants performance and usability between AR-HMDs and a desktop interface for Scenario-Based Training (SBT). They found no significant difference between the two interfaces in the time taken to accomplish tasks.…”

Section: Training With Ar-hmdsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acceptance of augmented reality for laboratory safety training: methodology and an evaluation study

Ismael,

McCall,

McGee

et al. 2024

Front. Virtual Real.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents a proof-of-concept Augmented Reality (AR) system known as “SMARTLab” for safety training in hazardous material science laboratories. The paper contains an overview of the design rationale, development, methodology, and user study. Participants of the user study were domain experts (i.e., actual lab users in a material science research department, n = 13), and the evaluation used a questionnaire and free-form interview responses. The participants undertook a virtual lab experiment, designed in collaboration with a domain expert. While using the AR environment, they were accompanied by a virtual assistant. The user study provides preliminary findings about the impact of multiple dimensions, such as Performance Expectancy, Emotional Reactivity, and Spatial Presence, on SMARTLab acceptance by analyzing their influence on the Behavioral Intention dimension. The findings indicate that users find the approach useful and that they would consider using such a system. Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the SMARTLab assessment data suggests that a) AR-based training is a potential solution for laboratory safety training without the risk of real-world hazards, b) realism remains an important property for some aspects such as fluid dynamics and experimental procedure, and c) use of a virtual assistant is welcome and provides no sense of discomfort or unease. Furthermore, the study recommends the use of AR assistance tools (a virtual assistant, an attention funnel, and an in-situ arrow) to improve usability and make the training experience more user-friendly.

show abstract