The Good Inequality: Supporting Group-Work in Shared Virtual Environments

Spante, Maria; Axelsson, Ann-Sofie; Schroeder, Ralph

doi:10.1007/1-4020-3898-4_7

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Often they assumed, according to their answers that the partners used the same kind of technology. Even if the collaborators do not know much about the system that their partners were using, when they become familiar with the differences they collaborated accordingly [34] -probably because they could establish a common ground and be aware of certain conventions easier [18,24]. Collaborating individuals often did not understand the sources of their problems and often assumed that their partners also had the same resources.…”

Section: Discussion and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are two heads better than one?

Heldal

Spante

Connell

2006

Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Under which conditions has collaboration added value over individual work? How does performance change when using different technologies? These are important questions for industry and for research. This paper addresses them for pairs versus individuals using physical objects and virtual representations for object-focused task-solving. Based upon previous research on pair's performance and experiences for collaboration in a real setting and four different distributed virtual environments (VEs), single-user experimental studies were carried out.The results show that in relation to performance, pairs working in networked CAVE™ technologies are superior compared to individuals, or pairs working in other distributed settings. In general, social interaction works as a facilitator for this type of task solving in networked VEs. Though, best performance was found in the real setting, with no major difference when comparing individuals versus pairs, working in VEs often were appreciated higher than working with physical objects.

show abstract

Section: Discussion and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are two heads better than one?

Heldal

Spante

Connell

2006

Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There is a certain level of separation from the present surroundings when a user is immersed in the VR environment, which can make the use of this technology difficult in collocated collaboration. Awareness of each other's position and emotions can be a challenge, although different viewpoints and capabilities can enhance collaboration in virtual tasks (Spante, Axelsson, & Schroeder, 2006). Alatta and Freewan (2017) found several benefits of using VR in the early stage of the design process in architecture and design but mentions that virtual environments are rarely used for collaboration due to the lack of support of such activities.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bringing Reality Back to Virtual Reality - A Collaborative Tool for Multidisciplinary Teams

Kohtala¹,

Kaland²,

Jacobsen³

et al. 2020

Balancing Innovation and Operation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of Virtual Reality (VR) supports larger strategic goals in the industry, including the geographically diverse working markets, large-scale projects and increased collaboration, both locally and globally. At the same time, VR is becoming increasingly popular as the technology becomes cheaper, more accessible, and better in terms of processing power and ease-of-use. The technology offers new possibilities for play, work and collaboration in various areas, from ordinary consumers to the industry. However, there are still many challenges before VR becomes a seamless experience for the user and can even cause restrictions in collaborative and multidisciplinary projects in some scenarios. One of the challenges with VR is the lack of a natural interface for interacting with the digital environment together with multiple users.In this paper we propose a new system combining a physical interface and a virtual environment that can be accessed through VR. Our aim is making collaboration in multidisciplinary teams in large-scale projects more productive through the joint effects of immersion and presence through VR and the tactility and intuitiveness of a physical interface. Our proof-of-concept prototype is presented, consisting of a physical 2D map and 3D printed objects that are being tracked with object detection and computer vision, which are linked to a digital twin. The digital twin can be accessed in VR in real time. We also explore solutions that can improve upon the prototype, such as producing an accurate physical 3D model of a real landscape to increase the resolution and authenticity of the physical model.A pilot experiment with 14 participants using our prototype has been conducted. Results of the study shows potential benefits of the system, such as the simplicity of a physical model promoting engagement, and the in-depth exploratory capabilities of the VR application enabling more solutions to be found. We also present limitations with potential solutions.

show abstract

“…In comparing virtual to in person problem solving among teams of people using 2D, 3D, and VR interfaces, (Slater et al, 2000 ; Slater and Sanchez-Vives, 2016 ) found that the individual in VR was more likely to emerge as the leader, even if that same person did not take on a leadership role in the in-person project. Spante et al ( 2006 ) also studied puzzle solving across VR and 2D systems; they found that team members assumed both had the same view until they traded places. Having different viewpoints enhanced collaboration, creating what Spante et al ( 2006 ) termed “the good inequality”.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Spante et al ( 2006 ) also studied puzzle solving across VR and 2D systems; they found that team members assumed both had the same view until they traded places. Having different viewpoints enhanced collaboration, creating what Spante et al ( 2006 ) termed “the good inequality”. Gugenheimer et al ( 2017 ) created a system where individuals in HMD could interact with individuals outside of VR through a “FaceDisplay,” a touch screen interface.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Authenticity, Interactivity, and Collaboration in VR Learning Games

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Decreasing cost and increasing technology access in schools places 3D immersive virtual reality (VR) within the reach of K-12 classrooms (Korbey, 2017 ). Educators have great interest in incorporating VR into classrooms because they are engaging and often novel experiences. However, long-term curriculum development must be positioned on how to best leverage the unique affordances of VR, be informed by theory and research, and integrate VR in meaningful ways that continue to motivate students even after experiences are no longer novel. We propose the theoretical framework of embodied learning and discuss how VR and reflect on current research findings to outline effective applications of VR and provide guidelines in developing educational materials using those tools. We discuss two particular examples: spatial awareness and collaboration. We share our perspectives on the benefits and challenges of applying these principles in a learning game about cellular biology.

show abstract

The Good Inequality: Supporting Group-Work in Shared Virtual Environments

Cited by 9 publications

References 16 publications

Are two heads better than one?

Are two heads better than one?

Bringing Reality Back to Virtual Reality - A Collaborative Tool for Multidisciplinary Teams

Authenticity, Interactivity, and Collaboration in VR Learning Games

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About