Different realities: a comparison of augmented and virtual reality for the sensemaking process

Abstract

Analysts perform sensemaking on large complex multimedia datasets in order to extract concepts, themes, and other kinds of insights from them. Immersive analytics, in particular, puts users in virtual environments that allow them to explore data in a unique way where they can interact and move through the data. Previous research using virtual reality immersive analytics tools found users wanting to refer to real-world objects or understand the physical world around them while continuing to perform their analysis. Therefore, we designed and ran a comparative study looking at the tradeoffs between virtual and augmented reality for our immersive analytics approach: Immersive Space to Think. Through two mixed-methods studies we found that virtual reality affords users a space where users can focus more on their task, but augmented reality allows them to use various real-world tools that can increase user satisfaction. In future immersive analytics tools, we recommend a blend of the two—augmented virtuality—with pass-through portals which allow users to see various real-world tools, such as whiteboards or desks and keyboards, while still giving themselves a space to focus.

Comparing the effects of augmented virtual reality treadmill training versus conventional treadmill training in patients with stage II-III Parkinson’s disease: the VIRTREAD-PD randomized controlled trial protocol

“…AVR is proposed as an interactive approach, that aims to amplify the effects of motor training, both directly and indirectly, increasing the patient’s motivation and satisfaction, promoting greater adherence and participation to treatment, and training also cognitive aspects of fall risk ( 14 ). For these reasons, AVR is considered an emerging and promising therapeutic tool in neurorehabilitation ( 15 ). In this regard, positive results emerged from the clinical trial of Gulcan et al ( 16 ) in which AVR-VR TT has been demonstrated to be effective in PD on most of spatial–temporal gait parameters compared to conventional physical therapy.…”