An evaluation for VR glasses system user experience: The influence factors of interactive operation and motion sickness

Applied Ergonomics

Volumn 74, Issue , 2019, Pages 206-213

  Yu, Mengli ^a   Zhou, Ronggang ^a   Wang, Huiwen ^a   Zhao, Weihua ^b  

^a BEIHANG UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b China Mobile Research Institute   (China)

Author keywords

Interactive operation; Motion sickness; User experience evaluation; VR glasses system

Indexed keywords

DISEASES; GLASS; HARDWARE; SURVEYS; VIRTUAL REALITY;

EVALUATION FRAMEWORK; INTERACTIVE OPERATIONS; MOBILE APPLICATIONS; MOTION SICKNESS; PERFORMANCE BASED; USER EXPERIENCE EVALUATIONS; USER EXPERIENCES (UX); VR GLASSES SYSTEM;

QUALITY CONTROL;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EXPERIENCE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; INTERACTIVE OPERATION; MALE; MOBILE APPLICATION; MOTION SICKNESS; NORMAL HUMAN; PREDICTION; QUESTIONNAIRE; SELF REPORT; SIMULATION; USER EXPERIENCE; VIRTUAL REALITY; VIRTUAL REALITY GLASS; COMPUTER INTERFACE; EVALUATION STUDY; PSYCHOLOGY; SPECTACLES;

EYEGLASSES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MOTION SICKNESS; SURVEYS AND QUESTIONNAIRES; USER-COMPUTER INTERFACE; VIRTUAL REALITY;

EID: 85052988619     PISSN: 00036870     EISSN: 18729126     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2018.08.012     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Allen, B., Hanley, T., Rokers, B., Green, C.S., Visual 3D motion acuity predicts discomfort in 3D stereoscopic environments. Entertain. Comput. 13 (2016), 1–9, 10.1016/j.entcom.2016.01.001.
2. Ames, S.L., Wolffsohn, J.S., McBrien, N.A., The development of a symptom questionnaire for assessing virtual reality viewing using a head-mounted display. Optom. Vis. Sci. 82 (2005), 168–176, 10.1097/01.opx.0000171186.02468.b7.
3. Bach, C., Scapin, D.L., Comparing inspections and user testing for the evaluation of virtual environments. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 26 (2010), 786–824, 10.1080/10447318.2010.487195.
4. Bower, M., Lee, M.J.W., Dalgarno, B., Collaborative learning across physical and virtual worlds: factors supporting and constraining learners in a blended reality environment. Br. J. Educ. Technol., 2016, 10.1111/bjet.12435.
5. Bowman, D.A., Gabbard, J.L., Hix, D., A survey of usability evaluation in virtual environments: classification and comparison of methods. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 11 (2002), 404–424, 10.1162/105474602760204309.
6. Chardonnet, J.-R., Mirzaei, M.A., Merienne, F., Visually induced motion sickness estimation and prediction in virtual reality using frequency components analysis of postural sway signal. Int. Conf. Artif. Real. Telexistence Eurographics Symp. Virtual Environ., 2015, 10.2312/egve.20151304.
7. Choi, E., Kim, H., Chung, M.K., A taxonomy and notation method for three-dimensional hand gestures. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 44 (2014), 171–188, 10.1016/j.ergon.2013.10.011.
8. Desai, P.R., Desai, P.N., Ajmera, K.D., Mehta, K., A review paper on Oculus rift-a virtual. Int. J. Eng. Trends Technol. 13 (2014), 175–179, 10.14445/22315381/IJETT-V13P237.
9. Dragoş, D., Lukoscha, S., Brazier, F., On the usability and effectiveness of different interaction types in augmented reality. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 31 (2015), 193–209, 10.1080/10447318.2014.994193.
10. Garrett, J.J., The Elements of User Experience : User-centered Design for the Web and beyond. second ed., 2011, Jesse James Garrett, 10.1145/889692.889709.
11. Howarth, P. a, Costello, P.J., The occurrence of virtual simulation sickness symptoms when an HMD was used as a personal viewing system. Displays 18 (1997), 107–116, 10.1016/S0141-9382(97)00011-5.
12. ISO 9241-210:2010, Ergonomics of human-system interaction - Part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (ISO 9241-210:2010). Int. Stand. Organ., 2, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1039/c0dt90114h.
13. Jeong, S., Jung, E.S., Im, Y., Ergonomic evaluation of interaction techniques and 3D menus for the practical design of 3D stereoscopic displays. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 53 (2016), 205–218, 10.1016/j.ergon.2016.01.001.
14. Kennedy, R.S., Lane, N.E., Berbaum, K.S., Lilienthal, M.G., Simulator sickness questionnaire: an enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. Int. J. Aviat. Psychol., 1993, 10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3.
15. Kim, S.-H., Suh, Y.-W., Yun, C., Yoo, E.-J., Yeom, J.-H., Cho, Y.A., Influence of stereopsis and abnormal binocular vision on ocular and systemic discomfort while watching 3D television. Eye 27 (2013), 1243–1248, 10.1038/eye.2013.173.
16. Krebs, W.K., Darken, R.P., Rowland, J.H., McCarley, J.S., Egocentric distance perception in a virutal environment using a perceptual matching task. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 43 (1999), 1256–1260, 10.1177/154193129904302219.
17. Lawson, B.D., Graeber, D.A., Mead, A.M., Muth, E.R., Signs and symptoms of human syndromes associated with synthetic experiences. Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation, and Applications, 2002, 589–618.
18. Li, Y., Jeon, W.R., Nam, C.S., Navigation by vibration: effects of vibrotactile feedback on a navigation task. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 46 (2015), 76–84, 10.1016/j.ergon.2014.12.008.
19. Lucero, A., Lyons, K., Ave, S.M., White, S., Exploring the interaction design space for interactive glasses. CHI ’13 Ext. Abstr. Hum. Factors Comput. Syst., 2013, 1341–1346, 10.1145/2468356.2468595.
20. McMahan, R.P., Bowman, D.A., Zielinski, D.J., Brady, R.B., Evaluating display fidelity and interaction fidelity in a virtual reality game. IEEE Trans. Visual. Comput. Graph. 18 (2012), 626–633, 10.1109/TVCG.2012.43.
21. McSherry, W., Draper, P., Kendrick, D., The construct validity of a rating scale designed to assess spirituality and spiritual care. Int. J. Nurs. Stud., 2002, 10.1016/S0020-7489(02)00014-7.
22. Olasky, J., Sankaranarayanan, G., Seymour, N.E., Magee, J.H., Enquobahrie, A., Lin, M.C., Aggarwal, R., Brunt, L.M., Schwaitzberg, S.D., Cao, C.G.L., De, S., Jones, D.B., Identifying opportunities for virtual reality simulation in surgical education: a review of the proceedings from the innovation, design, and emerging alliances in surgery (IDEAS) conference: VR surgery. Surg. Innovat. 22 (2015), 514–521, 10.1177/1553350615583559.
23. Papaefthymiou, M., Plelis, K., Mavromatis, D., Papagiannakis, G., Mobile Virtual Reality Featuring a Six Degrees of freedom Interaction Paradigm in a Virtual Museum Application., 2015 Technical Report, FORTH-ICS/TR-462.
24. Park, C.Y., Gu, N., Lim, C.-Y., Oh, J.-H., Chang, M., Kim, M., Rhee, M.-Y., The effect of Vaccinium uliginosum extract on tablet computer-induced asthenopia: randomized placebo-controlled study. BMC Compl. Alternative Med., 16, 2016, 296, 10.1186/s12906-016-1283-x.
25. Park, J., Han, S.H., Kim, H.K., Oh, S., Moon, H., Modeling user experience: a case study on a mobile device. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 43 (2013), 187–196, 10.1016/j.ergon.2013.01.005.
26. Pérez Fernández, R., Alonso, V., Virtual Reality in a shipbuilding environment. Adv. Eng. Software 81 (2015), 30–40, 10.1016/j.advengsoft.2014.11.001.
27. Regan, C., An investigation into nausea and other side-effects of head-coupled immersive virtual reality. Virtual Real. 1 (1995), 17–31, 10.1007/BF02009710.
28. Rushton, S., Mon-Williams, M., Wann, J.P., Binocular vision in a bi-ocular world: new-generation head-mounted displays avoid causing visual deficit. Displays 15 (1994), 255–260, 10.1016/0141-9382(94)90073-6.
29. Russell, M.E.B., Hoffman, B., Stromberg, S., Carlson, C.R., Use of controlled diaphragmatic breathing for the management of motion sickness in a virtual reality environment. Appl. Psychophysiol. Biofeedback 39 (2014), 269–277, 10.1007/s10484-014-9265-6.
30. Sharples, S., Cobb, S., Moody, A., Wilson, J.R., Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. Displays 29 (2008), 58–69, 10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.005.
31. Solimini, A.G., Are there side effects to watching 3D movies? A prospective crossover observational study on visually induced motion sickness. PLoS One, 8, 2013, 10.1371/journal.pone.0056160.
32. Stanney, K.M., Handbook of Virtual Environments: Design, Implementation, and Applications, Human Factors and Ergonomics Series. 2002.
33. Stanney, K.M., Mollaghasemi, M., Reeves, L., Breaux, R., Graeber, D.A., Usability engineering of virtual environments (VEs): identifying multiple criteria that drive effective VE system design. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 58 (2003), 447–481, 10.1016/S1071-5819(03)00015-6.
34. Tonidandel, S., LeBreton, J.M., RWA web: a free, comprehensive, web-based, and user-friendly tool for relative weight analyses. J. Bus. Psychol., 2014, 1–10, 10.1007/s10869-014-9351-z.
35. Tullis, T., Albert, B., Measuring the User Experience: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics. second ed., 2013, 10.1016/C2011-0-00016-9.
36. Vermeeren, A., Law, E., Roto, V., Obrist, Marianna Hoonhout, J., Väänänen-Vainio-Mattila, K., User experience evaluation methods: current state and development needs. Proc. Nord., 2010, 521–530, 10.1145/1868914.1868973.
37. Xu, Y.J., Zheng, S.J., Chen, Q.R., Ou, S.R., Cong, Liu, Yao, Xiao, The Design and Implementation of Chinese Vocabulary Learning Case Based on Mobile VR for “The Belt and Road”. 2017, DEStech Transactions on Computer Science and Engineering (cmsam).
38. Zhou, R., Chan, A.H.S., Using a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to determine product usability: a proposed theoretical framework. Work 56 (2017), 9–19, 10.3233/WOR-162474.
39. Zhou, R., Chan, A.H.S., Using a fuzzy comprehensive evaluation method to determine product usability: a test case. Work 56 (2017), 21–29, 10.3233/WOR-162473.