Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/1942/41429Full metadata record
| DC Field | Value | Language |
|---|---|---|
| dc.contributor.author | GEURTS, Eva | - |
| dc.contributor.author | VAN DEN BERGH, Jan | - |
| dc.contributor.author | VANHERLE, Bram | - |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2023-09-26T13:21:47Z | - |
| dc.date.available | 2023-09-26T13:21:47Z | - |
| dc.date.issued | 2023 | - |
| dc.date.submitted | 2023-09-25T12:09:45Z | - |
| dc.identifier.citation | ECCE '23: Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2023, ACM, (Art N° 14) | - |
| dc.identifier.isbn | 9798400708756 | - |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/1942/41429 | - |
| dc.description.abstract | Virtual Reality-based interactions are getting more mainstream in several domains, such as gaming, education, and training. While there is extensive literature on new interaction techniques, applying and recombining these for specific tool-based interactions remains challenging. We specifically look at promising VR manipulation techniques using controllers. We implemented these techniques in a proof-of-concept toolchain aimed at spray painters. We extracted and manipulated the relevant parts for a controlled within-subject comparative experiment with 16 participants. We find, among other things, that, as in direct manipulation, tool-based interaction with controllers in VR can benefit from zoom and separation of degrees of freedom to achieve effective and efficient manipulation. | - |
| dc.language.iso | en | - |
| dc.publisher | ACM | - |
| dc.rights | 2023 Copyright held by the owner/author(s). Publication rights licensed to ACM. Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from permissions@acm.org. ECCE ’23, September 19–22, 2023, Swansea, United Kingdom | - |
| dc.subject.other | Virtual reality, Tool-based interaction, Accurate manipulation | - |
| dc.subject.other | UX | - |
| dc.subject.other | Zoom | - |
| dc.subject.other | Haptic feedback | - |
| dc.title | Tool-based Interaction for Precise Manipulation in VR: an Exploratory Study | - |
| dc.type | Proceedings Paper | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.conferencedate | 19-09-2023 to 22-09-2023 | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.conferencename | European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.conferenceplace | Swansea | - |
| dc.identifier.epage | 8 | - |
| dc.identifier.spage | 1 | - |
| local.format.pages | 8 | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.jcat | C1 | - |
| dc.description.notes | Geurts, E (corresponding author), Hasselt Univ, Flanders Make Expertise Ctr Digital Media, TUL, Diepenbeek, Belgium. | - |
| dc.description.notes | eva.geurts@uhasselt.be; jan.vandenbergh@uhasselt.be; | - |
| dc.description.notes | bram.vanherle@uhasselt.be | - |
| local.publisher.place | 1601 Broadway, 10th Floor, NEW YORK, NY, UNITED STATES | - |
| dc.relation.references | [1] Nils Ove Beese, René Reinhard, and Thomas Lachmann. 2022. The right tools for the job: towards preference and performance considerations in the design of virtual reality interactions. In Proceedings of the 33rd European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics. 1–5. [2] Joanna Bergström, Tor-Salve Dalsgaard, Jason Alexander, and Kasper Hornbæk. 2021. How to Evaluate Object Selection and Manipulation in VR? Guidelines from 20 Years of Studies. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–20. [3] V Fuertes Bielsa. 2021. Virtual reality simulation in plastic surgery training. Literature review. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery 74, 9 (2021), 2372–2378. [4] Stefan Josef Breitschaft, Stella Clarke, and Claus-Christian Carbon. 2019. A theoretical framework of haptic processing in automotive user interfaces and its implications on design and engineering. Frontiers in Psychology 10 (2019), 1470. [5] Giuseppe Caggianese, Luigi Gallo, and Pietro Neroni. 2018. The vive controllers vs. leap motion for interactions in virtual environments: a comparative evaluation. In International Conference on Intelligent Interactive Multimedia Systems and Services. Springer, 24–33. [6] Kelly Caine. 2016. Local standards for sample size at CHI. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 981–992. [7] Fabio M Caputo, Marco Emporio, and Andrea Giachetti. 2018. The Smart Pin: An effective tool for object manipulation in immersive virtual reality environments. Computers & Graphics 74 (2018), 225–233. [8] Gerwin De Haan, Michal Koutek, and Frits H Post. 2002. Towards intuitive exploration tools for data visualization in VR. In Proceedings of the ACM symposium on Virtual reality software and technology. 105–112. [9] Diane Dewez, Ludovic Hoyet, Anatole Lécuyer, and Ferran Argelaguet Sanz. 2021. Towards “Avatar-Friendly” 3D Manipulation Techniques: Bridging the Gap Between Sense of Embodiment and Interaction in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21). ACM, New York, NY, USA, Article 264, 14 pages. https://doi. org/10.1145/3411764.3445379 [10] Martin Feick, Niko Kleer, Anthony Tang, and Antonio Krüger. 2020. The Virtual Reality Questionnaire Toolkit. In Adjunct Publication of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. 68–69. [11] Adrien Fonnet and Yannick Prie. 2019. Survey of immersive analytics. IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics 27, 3 (2019), 2101–2122. [12] Janet K Gibbs, Marco Gillies, and Xueni Pan. 2022. A comparison of the effects of haptic and visual feedback on presence in virtual reality. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 157 (2022), 102717. [13] Alexander Hann, Benjamin M Walter, Niklas Mehlhase, and Alexander Meining. 2019. Virtual reality in GI endoscopy: intuitive zoom for improving diagnostics and training. Gut 68, 6 (2019), 957–959. [14] Sandra G Hart and Lowell E Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in psychology. Vol. 52. Elsevier, USA, 139–183. [15] Devamardeep Hayatpur, Seongkook Heo, Haijun Xia,Wolfgang Stuerzlinger, and Daniel Wigdor. 2019. Plane, Ray, and Point: Enabling Precise Spatial Manipulations with Shape Constraints. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (New Orleans, LA, USA) (UIST ’19). ACM, NY, USA, 1185–1195. https://doi.org/10.1145/3332165.3347916 [16] Ananya Ipsita, Levi Erickson, Yangzi Dong, Joey Huang, Alexa K Bushinski, Sraven Saradhi, AnaMVillanueva, Kylie A Peppler, Thomas S Redick, and Karthik Ramani. 2022. Towards Modeling of Virtual Reality Welding Simulators to Promote Accessible and Scalable Training. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–21. [17] Jari Kangas, Sriram Kishore Kumar, Helena Mehtonen, Jorma Järnstedt, and Roope Raisamo. 2022. Trade-Off between Task Accuracy, Task Completion Time and Naturalness for Direct Object Manipulation in Virtual Reality. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 6, 1 (2022), 6. [18] Jari Kangas, Zhenxing Li, and Roope Raisamo. 2022. Expert Evaluation of Haptic Virtual Reality User Interfaces for Medical Landmarking. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems Extended Abstracts. 1–7. [19] Cheryl Lao, Haijun Xia, Daniel Wigdor, and Fanny Chevalier. 2021. Attribute Spaces: Supporting Design Space Exploration in Virtual Reality. In Symposium on Spatial User Interaction. 1–11. [20] Chia-Yang Lee, Wei-An Hsieh, David Brickler, Sabarish V. Babu, and Jung-Hong Chuang. 2021. Design and Empirical Evaluation of a Novel Near-Field Interaction Metaphor on Distant Object Manipulation in VR. In Symposium on Spatial User Interaction (Virtual Event, USA) (SUI ’21). Association for Computing Machinery, NewYork,NY, USA, Article 13, 11 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3485279.3485296 [21] Francesco Longo, Antonio Padovano, and Steven Umbrello. 2020. Value-oriented and ethical technology engineering in industry 5.0: A human-centric perspective for the design of the factory of the future. Applied Sciences 10, 12 (2020), 4182. [22] Emanuela Maggioni, Erika Agostinelli, and Marianna Obrist. 2017. Measuring the added value of haptic feedback. In 2017 ninth international conference on quality of multimedia experience (QoMEX). IEEE, 1–6. [23] Daniel Mendes, Fabio Marco Caputo, Andrea Giachetti, Alfredo Ferreira, and Joaquim Jorge. 2019. A survey on 3d virtual object manipulation: From the desktop to immersive virtual environments. In Computer graphics forum, Vol. 38. Wiley Online Library, 21–45. [24] Daniel Mendes, Filipe Relvas, Alfredo Ferreira, and Joaquim Jorge. 2016. The benefits of dof separation in mid-air 3d object manipulation. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM conference on virtual reality software and technology. 261–268. [25] Chika Edith Mgbemena, Ashutosh Tiwari, Yuchun Xu, Vinayak Prabhu, and Windo Hutabarat. 2020. Ergonomic evaluation on the manufacturing shop floor: A review of hardware and software technologies. CIRP Journal of Manufacturing Science and Technology 30 (2020), 68–78. [26] Thomas Muender, Michael Bonfert, Anke Verena Reinschluessel, Rainer Malaka, and Tanja Döring. 2022. Haptic Fidelity Framework: Defining the Factors of Realistic Haptic Feedback for Virtual Reality. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17. [27] Shiva Pedram, Stephen Palmisano, Richard Skarbez, Pascal Perez, and Matthew Farrelly. 2020. Investigating the process of mine rescuers’ safety training with immersive virtual reality: A structural equation modelling approach. Computers & Education 153 (2020), 103891. [28] Sarah Piechowski, Willi Pustowalow, Michael Arz, Jörn Rittweger, Edwin Mulder, Oliver Tobias Wolf, Bernd Johannes, and Jens Jordan. 2020. Virtual reality as training aid for manual spacecraft docking. Acta Astronautica 177 (2020), 731– 736. [29] Nico Reski and Aris Alissandrakis. 2020. Open data exploration in virtual reality: a comparative study of input technology. Virtual Reality 24, 1 (2020), 1–22. [30] Juan Jesús Roldán, Elena Crespo, Andrés Martín-Barrio, Elena Peña-Tapia, and Antonio Barrientos. 2019. A training system for Industry 4.0 operators in complex assemblies based on virtual reality and process mining. Robotics and computerintegrated manufacturing 59 (2019), 305–316. [31] Ben Shneiderman. 2003. The eyes have it: A task by data type taxonomy for information visualizations. In The craft of information visualization. Elsevier, USA, 364–371. [32] Goh Eg Su, Mohd Shahrizal Sunar, and Ajune Wanis Ismail. 2020. Device-based manipulation technique with separated control structures for 3D object translation and rotation in handheld mobile AR. International Journal of Human- Computer Studies 141 (2020), 102433. [33] Ketoma Vix Kemanji, Rene Mpwadina, and Gerrit Meixner. 2022. Virtual Reality Assembly of Physical Parts: The Impact of Interaction Interface Techniques on Usability and Performance. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, 350–368. [34] Graham Wilson, Mark McGill, Matthew Jamieson, Julie R Williamson, and Stephen A Brewster. 2018. Object manipulation in virtual reality under increasing levels of translational gain. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–13. [35] Qian Zhou, George Fitzmaurice, and Fraser Anderson. 2022. In-Depth Mouse: Integrating Desktop Mouse into Virtual Reality. In CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1–17. [36] Qianyuan Zou, Huidong Bai, Yuewei Zhang, Gun Lee, Fowler Allan, and Billinghurst Mark. 2021. Tool-based asymmetric interaction for selection in vr. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2021 Technical Communications. 1–4. | - |
| local.type.refereed | Refereed | - |
| local.type.specified | Proceedings Paper | - |
| local.bibliographicCitation.artnr | 14 | - |
| dc.identifier.doi | 10.1145/3605655.3605677 | - |
| dc.identifier.isi | 001144182000014 | - |
| local.provider.type | - | |
| local.bibliographicCitation.btitle | ECCE '23: Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2023 | - |
| local.description.affiliation | [Geurts, Eva; Van den Bergh, Jan; Vanherle, Bram] Hasselt Univ, Flanders Make Expertise Ctr Digital Media, TUL, Diepenbeek, Belgium. | - |
| local.uhasselt.international | no | - |
| item.accessRights | Open Access | - |
| item.fullcitation | GEURTS, Eva; VAN DEN BERGH, Jan & VANHERLE, Bram (2023) Tool-based Interaction for Precise Manipulation in VR: an Exploratory Study. In: ECCE '23: Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2023, ACM, (Art N° 14). | - |
| item.fulltext | With Fulltext | - |
| item.contributor | GEURTS, Eva | - |
| item.contributor | VAN DEN BERGH, Jan | - |
| item.contributor | VANHERLE, Bram | - |
| Appears in Collections: | Research publications | |
Files in This Item:
| File | Description | Size | Format | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 3605655.3605677.pdf Restricted Access | Published version | 1.91 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open Request a copy |
| ecce23-22.pdf | Peer-reviewed author version | 1.88 MB | Adobe PDF | View/Open |
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.