Performer vs. observer

Alallah, Fouad; Neshati, Ali; Sakamoto, Yumiko; Hasan, Khalad; Lank, Edward; Bunt, Andrea; Irani, Pourang

doi:10.1145/3281505.3281541

Cited by 39 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This subsection summarises the data captured from the 68 papers included for review 1 . Of these papers, 54 were sourced from conferences and 14 from journals.…”

Section: Top-level Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Review of Interaction Techniques for Immersive Environments

Spittle

Frutos-Pascual

Creed

et al. 2023

IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent proliferation of immersive technology has led to the rapid adoption of consumer-ready hardware for Augmented Reality (AR) and Virtual Reality (VR). While this increase has resulted in a variety of platforms that can offer a richer interactive experience, the advances in technology bring more variability in display types, interaction sensors and use cases. This provides a spectrum of device-specific interaction possibilities, with each offering a tailor-made solution for delivering immersive experiences to users, but often with an inherent lack of standardisation across devices and applications. To address this, a systematic review and an evaluation of explicit, task-based interaction methods in immersive environments are presented in this paper. A corpus of papers published between 2013 and 2020 is reviewed to thoroughly explore state-of-the-art user studies, which investigate input methods and their implementation for immersive interaction tasks (pointing, selection, translation, rotation, scale, viewport, menu-based and abstract). Focus is given to how input methods have been applied within the spectrum of immersive technology (AR, VR, XR). This is achieved by categorising findings based on display type, input method, study type, use case and task. Results illustrate key trends surrounding the benefits and limitations of each interaction technique and highlight the gaps in current research. The review provides a foundation for understanding the current and future directions for interaction studies in immersive environments, which, at this pivotal point in XR technology adoption, provides routes forward for achieving more valuable, intuitive and natural interactive experiences.

show abstract

“…This subsection summarises the data captured from the 68 papers included for review 1 . Of these papers, 54 were sourced from conferences and 14 from journals.…”

Section: Top-level Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2 of these studies examined the device type, where different interaction form factors were explored [32,82]. Alallah et al [1] also compared the affects of input and from which point of view (performer vs observer).…”

Section: Study Typementioning

confidence: 99%

A Review of Interaction Techniques for Immersive Environments

Spittle

Frutos-Pascual

Creed

et al. 2023

IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graphics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, we argue that the most significant challenge of using VR in-flight is social acceptance. Recent research has explored the social acceptability of using VR headsets in different contexts such as home, while travelling, and in third places [56] and from different perspectives, including performer and spectator [7]. Social acceptability is an issue when any new technology requires users to engage in highly visible or unusual behaviour in front of others [51].…”

Section: Social Acceptability and Barriers To Vr Adoptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Now is a critical time to assess social acceptability because VR headsets are on the cusp of more widespread use, and early adopters are already exploring their use during air travel [62]. There is a need to understand VR use in-flight from both the user's and spectator's perspectives [7,31], identifying issues of peripheral awareness, social acceptability, interruption, and unintentional disruption. However, there are obvious ethical and logistical issues involved in performing in-situ study of user behaviours during air travel.…”

Section: Survey Study: Attitudes To Vr For Aeroplane Passengersmentioning

confidence: 99%

PlaneVR

Williamson

McGill

Outram

2019

Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In many cases, the individual human-technology interaction has the privileged position and "context" is used as an umbrella term for "everything else" [25]. The terms "observer" (e.g., [2,10]), "spectator" (e.g., [5,37]), or "audience" [38] commonly refer to the other people as part of the context, giving them a particular role in an orbit around the user. Imagine you would have accepted the phone call in the scenarios above: Neither are the other people at the concert hall nor your family members just your observers.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Better Understanding of Social Acceptability

Uhde

Hassenzahl

2021

Extended Abstracts of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social contexts play an important role in understanding acceptance and use of technology. However, current approaches used in HCI to describe contextual influence do not capture it appropriately. On the one hand, the often used Technology Acceptance Model and related frameworks are too rigid to account for the nuanced variations of social situations. On the other hand, Goffman's dramaturgical model of social interactions emphasizes interpersonal relations but mostly overlooks the material (e.g., technology) that is central to HCI. As an alternative, we suggest an approach based on Social Practice Theory. We conceptualize social context as interactions between co-located social practices and acceptability as a matter of their (in)compatibilities. Finally, we outline how this approach provides designers with a better understanding of different types of social acceptability problems and helps finding appropriate solutions. CCS CONCEPTS• Human-centered computing → HCI theory, concepts and models; Ubiquitous and mobile computing theory, concepts and paradigms.

show abstract

Performer vs. observer

Cited by 39 publications

References 33 publications

A Review of Interaction Techniques for Immersive Environments

A Review of Interaction Techniques for Immersive Environments

PlaneVR

Towards a Better Understanding of Social Acceptability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About