SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2411.15583

Exploring Viewing Modalities in Cinematic Virtual Reality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Challenges in Evaluating User Experience

Abstract

Cinematic Virtual Reality (CVR) is a narrative-driven VR experience that uses head-mounted displays with a 360-degree field of view. Previous research has explored different viewing modalities to enhance viewers' CVR experience. This study conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis focusing on how different viewing modalities, including intervened rotation, avatar assistance, guidance cues, and perspective shifting, influence the CVR experience. The study has screened 3444 papers (between 01/01/2013 and 17/06/2023) and selected 45 for systematic review, 13 of which also for meta-analysis. We conducted separate random-effects meta-analysis and applied Robust Variance Estimation to examine CVR viewing modalities and user experience outcomes. Evidence from experiments was synthesized as differences between standardized mean differences (SMDs) of user experience of control group ("Swivel-Chair" CVR) and experiment groups. To our surprise, we found inconsistencies in the effect sizes across different studies, even with the same viewing modalities. Moreover, in these studies, terms such as "presence," "immersion," and "narrative engagement" were often used interchangeably. Their irregular use of questionnaires, overreliance on self-developed questionnaires, and incomplete data reporting may have led to unrigorous evaluations of CVR experiences. This study contributes to Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research by identifying gaps in CVR research, emphasizing the need for standardization of terminologies and methodologies to enhance the reliability and comparability of future CVR research.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Yawen Zhang, Han Zhou, Zhoumingju Jiang, Zilu Tang, Tao Luo, Qinyuan Lei. 2024-11-23. Exploring Viewing Modalities in Cinematic Virtual Reality: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Challenges in Evaluating User Experience. https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.15583

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

ShellVis: Sandboxed Live Programming for Shell Scripts

Live programming provides visibility to programmers by running and tracing programs as they are edited. However, for programs with potentially harmful side effects, liveness can turn mistakes into disasters. We propose enabling live programming in environments with side effects via sandboxing: confining effects to a simulation of the true environment. We apply sandboxed live programming in the challenging context of shell scripting: a ubiquitous and powerful---yet notoriously opaque and error-prone---tool. ShellVis provides line-by-line feedback on a shell script's run-time behavior, with file operations sandboxed via a safe overlay of the file system. A qualitative user evaluation finds ShellVis to be helpful to participants, replacing tedious existing practices and instilling confidence. Participant responses also reveal areas for future research, particularly bridging the gulf of execution alongside the gulf of evaluation. ShellVis serves as a case study of how sandboxing can bring live-programming techniques into the many real-world programming contexts where side effects are important.

cs.HC

Visual-Motion-Induced Modulation of Pedestrian Trajectories Using Spatially Distributed Multi-Display Signage in Public Spaces

Multi-display signage (MDS), now ubiquitous in urban environments, has the potential to influence human behavior and experience in public spaces. However, despite its unique capability to present spatially distributed dynamic visual stimuli, its current use is mainly limited to advertising. In this study, we propose a perception-based approach for laterally modulating pedestrian trajectories as a nonverbal means of guiding pedestrians in public spaces. The approach is motivated by vection, the illusion of self-motion, and uses laterally moving monochrome stripes, a standard stimulus in vection research, presented across spatially distributed displays to elicit postural responses that may bias pedestrian trajectories. We evaluated the approach through a controlled laboratory experiment and a real-world field deployment involving actual pedestrian flows in a national museum. The laboratory experiment examined whether the MDS setup induced trajectory shifts in the direction predicted by prior research on the behavioral effects of vection. The field deployment investigated whether comparable effects would emerge in aggregate pedestrian behavior during unconstrained movement under conditions closer to those of urban public spaces. In the laboratory, full-screen motion significantly biased walking trajectories in the direction of visual motion, whereas partial-stripe motion produced no significant directional effect. In the field deployment, opposing full-screen motion conditions produced direction-consistent differences in aggregate pedestrian positions. The field results, observed despite the substantial variability in real-world pedestrian flows, extend the controlled laboratory findings and provide ecologically valid evidence supporting practical MDS-based pedestrian modulation in public settings. The results further suggest that sufficient visual-motion coverage may be important.

cs.HC

How AI Coders Discuss, Disagree, and Reach Consensus: Challenges and Opportunities for LLM-Based Qualitative Coding

The utility of AI in multi-coder qualitative coding has been widely discussed, yet little empirical evidence exists to delineate the contexts in which it performs reliably. We address this gap by quantifying the effectiveness of multi-agent LLM coding across varied qualitative datasets, revealing key contextual and structural factors that mediate coding outcomes. We developed a literature-informed baseline pipeline that enables AI agents to independently code, debate, and reconcile disagreements. Results revealed that coding accuracy depends on factors such as codebook length, qualitative data similarity, and agent disagreement. Notably, intense and unresolved debates between agents led to higher accuracy. Our analysis showed that while LLMs emulate many human discussion behaviors, they lack adaptive responsiveness to context. From these findings, we offer design recommendations for building automated coding systems. Our open-source AI discussion dataset and methodological framework lay the groundwork for advancing the design of AI-mediated automated thematic analysis.

cs.HC