Watch, Press, and Catch – Impact of Divided Attention on Requirements of Audiovisual Quality

  • Ulrich Reiter
  • Satu Jumisko-Pyykkö
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4552)


Many of today’s audiovisual application systems offer some kind of interactivity. Yet, quality assessments of these systems are often performed without taking into account the possible effects of divided attention caused by interaction or user task. We present a subjective assessment performed among 40 test subjects to investigate the impact of divided attention on the perception of audiovisual quality in interactive application systems. Test subjects were asked to rate the overall perceived audiovisual quality in an interactive 3D scene with varying degrees of interactive tasks to be performed by the subjects. As a result we found that the experienced overall quality did not vary with the degree of interaction. The results of our study make clear that in the case where interactivity is offered in an audiovisual application, it is not generally possible to technically lower the signal quality without perceptual effects.


audiovisual quality subjective assessment divided attention interactivity task 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Beerends, J.G., de Caluwe, F.E.: The influence of video quality on perceived audio quality and vice versa. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society 47(5), 355–362 (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coen, M.: Multimodal Integration - A Biological View. In: Proceedings of IJCAI 2001, Seattla, WA (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Coolican, H.: Research methods and statistics in psychology, 4th edn. J. W. Arrowsmith Ltd, London (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    EBU Tech. 3276-E-2nd edn., Listening conditions for the assessment of sound programme material, Geneva (1998) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gibson, J.J.: The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Lawrence Eribaum, Houghton Mifflin, Boston (1979)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hands, D.: Multimodal Quality Perception: The Effects of Attending to Content on Subjective Quality Ratings. In: Proceedings of IEEE 3rd Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing, 1999, Copenhagen, Denmark, pp. 503–508 (1999)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ISO/IEC 14496:2001, Coding of audio-visual objects (MPEG-4) (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ITU-R BT.500-11 Methodology for the subjective assessment of the quality of television pictures, International Telecommunications Union – Radiocommunication sector (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    ITU-R BS.1116-1, Methods for the subjective assessment of small impairments in audio systems including multichannel sound systems, International Telecommunication Union, Geneva (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    ITU-T P.910 Recommendation P.910, Subjective audiovisual quality assessment methods for multimedia application, International Telecommunication Union – Telecommunication sector (1998)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jumisko-Pyykkö, S., Reiter, U.: Produced quality is not the perceived quality – A Qualitative Approach to Overall Audiovisual Quality. In: Proceedings of 3DTV Conference, IEEE, Los Alamitos (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Larsson, P., Vastfjall, D., Kleiner, M.: Ecological Acoustics and the Multimodal Perception of Rooms: Real and Unreal Experiences of Auditory-Visual Virtual Environments. In: Proc. 2001 International Conference on Auditory Display, Espoo, Finland (July 29 - August 1, 2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kassier, R., Zielinski, S.K., Rumsey, F.: Computer Games And Multichannel Audio Quality Part 2- Evaluation Of Time-Variant Audio Degradations Under Divided and Undivided Attention. In: Proceedings of the AES 115th International Conference, New York, USA (October 10-13, 2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pashler, H.E.: The psychology of attention. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reiter, U., Schwark, M.: A plug-in based audio rendering concept for an MPEG-4 Audio subset. In: Proc. IEEE/ISCE 2004 International Symposium on Consumer Electronics, Reading/UK (September 2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reiter, U., Holzhäuser, S.: An Input Device for Subjective Assessments of Bimodal Audio visual Perception. In: IEEE/ISCE 2005, International Symposium on Consumer Electronics, Macau SAR/China (June 2005) ISBN 0-7803-8920-4Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Reiter, U., Großmann, S., Strohmeier, D., Exner, M.: Observations on Bimodal Audio visual Subjective Assessments. In: Proceedings of the 120th AES Convention, Paris, France, Convention Paper 6852 (May 20-23, 2006)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rimell, A.N., Hollier, M.P., Voelcker, R.M.: The influence of cross-modal interaction on audio-visual speech quality perception. In: Presented at the AES Convention, San Francisco, Audio Engineering Society Preprint 4791 (September 26-29, 1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rimell, A.N., Hollier, M.P.: The Significance of Cross-Modal Interaction in Audio-Visual Quality Perception. In: e-proceedings of Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing, September 13-15, 1999, Copenhagen, Denmark. IEEE Signal Processing Society (1999)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rimell, A., Owen, A.: The effect of focused attention on audio-visual quality perception with applications in multi-modal codec design. In: Proceedings of International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing, 2000. ICASSP 2000, 5-9 June 2000, vol. 6, pp. 2377–2380, vol.4. IEEE (2000)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Styles, E.A.: The psychology of attention. Psychology Press, Hove, England (1997)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zielinski, S.K., Rumsey, F., Bech, S., Bruyn, B., Kassier, R.: Computer Games And Multichannel Audio Quality - The Effect Of Division Of Attention Between Auditory And Visual Modalities. In: presented at the AES 24th International Conference on Multichannel Audio, Banff, Canada (June 26-28, 2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ulrich Reiter
    • 1
  • Satu Jumisko-Pyykkö
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Media Technology, Technische Universität Ilmenau, Helmholtzplatz 2, 98693 IlmenauGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Human-Centered Technology, Tampere University of Technology, P.O. BOX 553, 33101 TampereFinland

Personalised recommendations