The effect of combined aids on users performance in collaborative virtual environments

Abstract

For Collaborative Virtual Environments (CVEs), many interaction techniques have been developed. Depending on the purpose of the collaborative work, techniques of interaction and manipulation change from one application to another. There is no general, good and efficient solution for all the collaborative systems. In addition, people in CVEs also use communication channels to share task goals, task decomposition and task progress. Therefore, awareness and communications are usually considered as important instruments to complete collaborative task. In this paper, we have combined different virtual navigation aids i.e. 3DML + audio, 3DML + textual, 3DML + arrows-casting, arrows-casting + audio, arrows-casting + textual and audio + textual; and presented a comparative study of user performance to perform an assembly task in CVEs. We reported the results of a precise experiment containing, 30 virtual teams of 60 individual students. Overall, results showed that students performed task faster using 3DML + arrows-casting while they were slow with audio + textual support in navigation.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13

References

  1. 1.

    Bowers J, Pycock J, O’brien J (1996) Talk and embodiment in collaborative virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 58–65

  2. 2.

    Chen CH, Yang JC, Shen S, Jeng MC (2007) A desktop virtual reality earth motion system in astronomy education. J Educ Technol Soc 10(3):289–304

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Chen CJ, Ismail WMFW (2008) Guiding exploration through three-dimensional virtual environments: a cognitive load reduction approach. J Interact Learn Res 19(4):579–596

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Chen J, et al. (2003) Effective interaction techniques in information-rich virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the young VR

  5. 5.

    Churchill EF, Snowdon DN, Munro AJ (2012) Collaborative virtual environments: digital places and spaces for interaction. Springer Science & Business Media, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Dominic J, Robb A (2020) Exploring effects of screen-fixed and world-fixed annotation on navigation in virtual reality. In: 2020 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3d user interfaces (VR), pp 607–615

  7. 7.

    Golledge RG, et al. (1999) Wayfinding behavior: cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. JHU press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Hanna N, Richards D, et al. (2014) Evaluation framework for 3d collaborative virtual environments (the core). In: PACIS, p 284

  9. 9.

    Harrison SR, Dourish P (1996) Re-place-ing space: the roles of place and space in collaborative systems. In: CSCW, vol 96, pp 67–76

  10. 10.

    Hölscher C, Büchner SJ, Meilinger T, Strube G (2006) Map use and wayfinding strategies in a multi-building ensemble. In: International conference on spatial cognition. Springer, New York, pp 365–380

  11. 11.

    Inamura T, Mizuchi Y (2019) Robot competition to evaluate guidance skill for general users in vr environment. In: 2019 14Th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI), pp 552–553

  12. 12.

    Khan N, Rahman AU (2018) Rethinking the mini-map: a navigational aid to support spatial learning in urban game environments. Int J Human–Comput Inter 34(12):1135–1147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Kiraly AP, Helferty JP, Hoffman EA, McLennan G, Higgins WE (2004) Three-dimensional path planning for virtual bronchoscopy. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 23(11):1365–1379

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Klippel A, Hirtle S, Davies C (2010) You-are-here maps: creating spatial awareness through map-like representations. Spatial Cognit Comput 10 (2-3):83–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Latombe JC (2006) Probabilistic roadmaps: a motion planning approach based on active learning. In: 2006 5th IEEE international conference on cognitive informatics, IEEE, vol 1, pp 1–2

  16. 16.

    Lobben AK (2007) Navigational map reading: predicting performance and identifying relative influence of map-related abilities. Ann Assoc Am Geogr 97(1):64–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Meade ME, Meade JG, Sauzeon H, Fernandes MA (2019) Active navigation in virtual environments benefits spatial memory in older adults. Brain Sci 9(3):47

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Monahan T, McArdle G, Bertolotto M (2008) Virtual reality for collaborative e-learning. Comput Educ 50(4):1339–1353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Montuwy A, Dommes A, Cahour B (2019) Helping older pedestrians navigate in the city: comparisons of visual, auditory and haptic guidance instructions in a virtual environment. Behav Inform Technol 38(2):150–171

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Nguyen TTH, Duval T, Fleury C. (2013) Guiding techniques for collaborative exploration in multi-scale shared virtual environments

  21. 21.

    Noborio H, Naito S, Kawata D (2002) A comparative study of modified best-first and randomized algorithms for image-based path-planning. In: Proceedings 2002 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (Cat. No. 02CH37292), IEEE, vol 4, pp 4255–4262

  22. 22.

    Raees M, Ullah S, Rahman SU (2019) Ven-3dve: vision based egocentric navigation for 3d virtual environments. Int J Interact Design Manufact (IJIDeM) 13(1):35–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Raper J, Gartner G, Karimi H, Rizos C (2007) A critical evaluation of location based services and their potential. J Loc Based Serv 1(1):5–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Rehman IU, Ullah S, Rabbi I (2014) The effect of semantic multi-modal aids using guided virtual assembly environment. In: 2014 international conference on open source systems & technologies, IEEE, pp 87–92

  25. 25.

    Rothe S, Buschek D, Hußmann H (2019) Guidance in cinematic virtual reality-taxonomy, research status and challenges. Multimodal Technol Interact 3(1). https://doi.org/10.3390/mti3010019. https://www.mdpi.com/2414-4088/3/1/19

  26. 26.

    Sampaio A, Henriques P, Ferreira P (2006) Virtual reality technology applied in civil engineering education. Proceedings of m-ICTE 4

  27. 27.

    Sayers H, Wilson S, McNeill M (2004) Navigational tools for desktop virtual environment interfaces. Virt Real 7(3-4):131–139

    Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Schlender D, Peters OH, Wienhöfer M (2000) The effects of maps and textual information on navigation in a desktop virtual environment. Spat Cogn Comput 2(4):421–433

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Shendarkar A, Vasudevan K, Lee S, Son YJ (2006) Crowd simulation for emergency response using bdi agent based on virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 2006 winter simulation conference, IEEE, pp 545–553

  30. 30.

    Tao Y, Ganz A (2020) Simulation framework for evaluation of indoor navigation systems. IEEE Access 8:20028–20042

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Tsovaltzi D, Rummel N, McLaren BM, Pinkwart N, Scheuer O, Harrer A, Braun I (2010) Extending a virtual chemistry laboratory with a collaboration script to promote conceptual learning. Int J Technol Enhanced Learn 2 (1-2):91–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Ullah S, Ali N, Rahman SU (2016) The effect of procedural guidance on students’ skill enhancement in a virtual chemistry laboratory. J Chem Educ 93(12):2018–2025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Wang HM, Zhou XZ (2009) Improved shortest path algorithm for restricted searching area [j]. Journal of Nanjing University of Science and Technology (Natural Science) 5

  34. 34.

    Wu F, Thomas J, Chinnola S, Rosenberg ES (2020) Exploring communication modalities to support collaborative guidance in virtual reality. In: 2020 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3d user interfaces abstracts and workshops (VRW), pp 79–86

  35. 35.

    Yong S, Moon HY, Sohn Y, Fernandes M (2008) A survey of security issues in collaborative virtual environment. IJCSNS 8(1):14–19

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Numan Ali.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Khalid, S., Ullah, S., Ali, N. et al. The effect of combined aids on users performance in collaborative virtual environments. Multimed Tools Appl 80, 9371–9391 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-020-09953-9

Download citation

Keywords

  • Virtual reality (VR)
  • 3D virtual environments (VEs)
  • Collaborative virtual environments (CVEs)
  • Navigational aids
  • Visual and audio aids
  • Three dimensional map with liner (3DML)
  • Combined navigational aids