Unperturbed video streaming QoE under web page related context factors

Seufert, Michael; Zach, Ondrej; Slanina, Martin; Tran-Gia, Phuoc

doi:10.1109/qomex.2017.7965675

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Contrary to our expectations, the results show no significant influence of the interface design on the perceived video quality as well as on the acceptance (H1 and H2). Nevertheless, they are in accordance to findings about the influence of advertisement banners described in [28]. Additionally, no general influence of the interface design on the degree of annoyance of stalling events is observed (H3).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Therefore, most of the studies are being carried out in vitro, which means that the stimuli are displayed without context and without embedding them, e.g., into a real streaming service environment like YouTube or Netflix. For research on video streaming, it is well established to provide simple web interfaces including the video to be rated on a plain background, like in [19,28,33]. Here, unlike a real streaming portal, no video recommendations or posted comments are visible.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For investigating the impact of the in vivo or in vitro interface design, the selected video is shown either on a YouTube-like web site or a plain gray background similar to [28]. The video to be displayed as well as the design setting is randomly selected before a participant accesses a test.…”

Section: In Vivo and In Vitro Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

In vitro vs in vivo: does the study’s interface design influence crowdsourced video QoE?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evaluating the Quality of Experience (QoE) of video streaming and its influence factors has become paramount for streaming providers, as they want to maintain high satisfaction for their customers. In this context, crowdsourced user studies became a valuable tool to evaluate different factors which can affect the perceived user experience on a large scale. In general, most of these crowdsourcing studies either use, what we refer to, as an in vivo or an in vitro interface design. In vivo design means that the study participant has to rate the QoE of a video that is embedded in an application similar to a real streaming service, e.g., YouTube or Netflix. In vitro design refers to a setting, in which the video stream is separated from a specific service and thus, the video plays on a plain background. Although these interface designs vary widely, the results are often compared and generalized. In this work, we use a crowdsourcing study to investigate the influence of three interface design alternatives, an in vitro and two in vivo designs with different levels of interactiveness, on the perceived video QoE. Contrary to our expectations, the results indicate that there is no significant influence of the study’s interface design in general on the video experience. Furthermore, we found that the in vivo design does not reduce the test takers’ attentiveness. However, we observed that participants who interacted with the test interface reported a higher video QoE than other groups.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In vitro vs in vivo: does the study’s interface design influence crowdsourced video QoE?

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, two crowdsourced studies have been conducted on the impact of the encoding bit rate on the QoE of H.264 videos, which included implicit test conditions for advertisements. The first study displayed different advertisement banners on the video page and results of this study were already published as a part of our previous experiment described in [5]. The second study then builds on the previous study by incorporating pre-roll and mid-roll advertisement clips in the video quality test.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Investigating the Impact of Advertisement Banners and Clips on Video QoE

Zach

Slanina

Seufert

2018

2018 IEEE 38th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although Quality of Experience (QoE) of Internet services can be affected by context influence factors, their actual impact is not widely investigated yet. In the context of online video services, web portals often display advertisement banners or clips to monetize their service. However, these advertisements can distract or annoy the users, which might degrade the QoE of the actual video service. In this work, two crowdsourcing studies were conducted to investigate the impact of advertisement banners and clips on video QoE. Therefore, both theoretical opinions on in-service advertisements and subjective quality ratings are evaluated. The findings confirm that advertisements are negatively perceived by users during service consumption, but a generally negative impact on video QoE cannot be supported, as the interplay of advertisement and the QoE of video services is rather complex.

show abstract

“…Periodically, new rankings are computed and irrelevant content is replaced according to the Least Recently Used (LRU) strategy. The used software to run the prediction algorithms and manage the cache is a Java web application, which is deployed in a Jetty 23 web server. The web server also provides a user interface, which can be accessed by users with any browser to manage their local cache and access point, and a Representational State Transfer (REST) API to allow the Android app to register users in remote home routers.…”

Section: C) Design and Prototype Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%