Advertisement

Uses of Virtual Reality for Communication in Financial Services: A Case Study on Comparing Different Telepresence Interfaces: Virtual Reality Compared to Video Conferencing

  • Abraham G. CampbellEmail author
  • Thomas Holz
  • Jonny Cosgrove
  • Mike Harlick
  • Tadhg O’Sullivan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 69)

Abstract

This paper examines the use of Virtual Reality to conduct meetings online and compares them with an approach using traditional video teleconferencing software. The research was conducted using Virtual Reality meeting software and Skype for Business as test environments to compare a Virtual Reality meeting versus a Video conferencing environment. The results point to the improved feelings of presence, closeness, and arousal for Virtual Reality environments, but also demonstrate a difference in the experience for female and male participants. In particular, the use of Avatar’s instead of real-life video images of the participants was preferred by female participants which points to a possible de-biasing ability for Virtual Reality environments. The results also indicate a need to explore different interfaces designs and discuss the lessons learnt from the historical adoption of technology by the financial services community.

Keywords

Virtual reality Telepresence User studies Conference calls Video conferencing 

Notes

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Airfibre for providing a dedicated 20 mbit line which allowed the Video Conferencing software control to run at 1080P. Antonio Tallon and HTC for technical support and advice during the experiment. The experiment was supported by Bank of Ireland, MeetingRoom.io and Wooq Ventures and it would not have been possible without their support.

References

  1. 1.
    Sutherland, I.E.: The ultimate display. In: Proceedings of the IFIP Congress, vol. 2. International Federation for Information Processing (1965)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rheingold, H.: Virtual Reality. Simon & Schuster, New York (1992)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cruz-Neira, C., Sandin, D.J., DeFanti, T.A., Kenyon, R.V., Hart, J.C.: The CAVE: audio visual experience automatic virtual environment. Commun. ACM 35(6), 64–72 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denby, B., Campbell, A.G., Carr, H., O’Hare, G.M.P.: The LAIR lightweight affordable immersion room. Presence: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 18(5), 409–411 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caudell, T.P., Mizell, D.W.: Augmented reality: an application of heads-up display technology to manual manufacturing processes, vol. 2, pp. 659–669, August 2002Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Milgram, P., Kishino, F.: A taxonomy of mixed reality visual displays. IEICE (Inst. Electron. Inf. Commun. Eng.) Trans. Inf. Syst. 77(12), 1321–1329 (1994). Special issue on Networked RealityGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Russon, M.-A.: Virtual reality: 70 not so keen to have one at home (2016)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Campbell, A.G., Santiago, K., Hoo, D., Mangina, E.: Future mixed reality educational spaces. In: Future Technologies Conference (FTC), pp. 1088–1093. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sampaio, A.Z., Ferreira, M.M., Rosário, D.P., Martins, O.P.: 3D and VR models in civil engineering education: construction, rehabilitation and maintenance. Autom. Constr. 19(7), 819–828 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    McCloy, R., Stone, R.: Science, medicine, and the future: virtual reality in surgery. BMJ: Br. Med. J. 323(7318), 912 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Korgaonkar, P.K., Moschis, G.P.: Consumer adoption of videotex services. J. Dir. Mark. 1(4), 63–71 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Görgü, L., Campbell, A., Dragone, M., O’Hare, G.M.P.: Exergaming: a future of mixing entertainment and exercise assisted by mixed reality agents. Comput. Entertain. (CIE) 8(4), 27 (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thomas, B., Close, B., Donoghue, J., Squires, J., De Bondi, P., Piekarski, W.: First person indoor/outdoor augmented reality application: arquake. Pers. Ubiquit. Comput. 6(1), 75–86 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tan, M., Teo, T.S.H.: Factors influencing the adoption of internet banking. J. AIS 1(1es), 5 (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ajzen, I.: The theory of planned behavior. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50(2), 179–211 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rogers, E.M.: Diffusion of Innovations. Simon and Schuster, New York (1962)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Simjian, L.G.: Depository machine combined with image recording means. US Patent 3,079,603, 26 February 1963Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Constable, G.E.P., Cullen, G.E., Swarbrick, R.: Access-control equipment and itemdispensing systems including such equipment. US Patent 3,543,904, 1 December 1970Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fletcher, C.: Videotex: return engagement: undaunted by unsuccessful ventures, US corporate giants are planning new investments to give the technology a second chance. IEEE Spectr. 22(10), 34–38 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Karduck, A.P., Geiser, A., Gutekunst, T.: Multimedia technology in banking. IEEE Multimedia 3(4), 82–86 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Landauer, T.K.: The Trouble with Computers: Usefulness, Usability, and Productivity. Taylor & Francis, Milton Park (1995)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Allen, B.: Information Tasks: Toward a User-Centered Approach to Information Systems. Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley (1996)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Olatokun, W.M., Igbinedion, L.J.: The adoption of automatic teller machines in Nigeria: an application of the theory of diffusion of innovation. Issues Informing Sci. Inf. Technol. 6(2), 373–393 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Donner, J., Tellez, C.A.: Mobile banking and economic development: linking adoption, impact, and use. Asian J. Commun. 18(4), 318–332 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wissmath, B., Weibel, D., Mast, F.W.: Measuring presence with verbal versus pictorial scales: a comparison between online-and ex post-ratings. Virtual Real. 14(1), 43–53 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Weibel, D., Schmutz, J., Pahud, O., Wissmath, B.: Measuring spatial presence: introducing and validating the pictorial presence SAM. PRESENCE: Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 24(1), 44–61 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bradley, M.M., Lang, P.J.: Measuring emotion: the self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. J. Behav. Ther. Exp. Psychiatry 25(1), 49–59 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Riva, G., Davide, F., IJsselsteijn, W.A.: Being there: the experience of presence in mediated environments. In: Being There: Concepts, Effects and Measurement of User Presence in Synthetic Environments, vol. 5 (2003)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Takatalo, J., Nyman, G., Laaksonen, L.: Components of human experience in virtual environments. Comput. Hum. Behav. 24(1), 1–15 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Mennecke, B., Roche, E.M., Bray, D.A., Konsynski, B., Lester, J., Rowe, M., Townsend, A.M.: Second life and other virtual worlds: a roadmap for research (2007)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    DeMarco, M., Lesser, E., O’Driscoll, T.: Leadership in a distributed world: lessons from online gaming. IBM Institute for Business Value (2007)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dodgson, M., Gann, D.M., Phillips, N.: Organizational learning and the technology of foolishness: the case of virtual worlds at IBM. Organ. Sci. 24(5), 1358–1376 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Van De Zande, P.: The day des died. SANS Institute (2001)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Alanazi, H., Zaidan, B.B., Zaidan, A.A., Jalab, H.A., Shabbir, M., Al-Nabhani, Y., et al.: New comparative study between des, 3DES and AES within nine factors. arXiv preprint arXiv:1003.4085 (2010)
  35. 35.
    Slater, M., Steed, A.: A virtual presence counter. Presence 9(5), 413–434 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Czerwinski, M., Tan, D.S., Robertson, G.G.: Women take a wider view. In: Proceedings of CHI 2002, pp. 195–202. ACM Press (2002)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    O’Hare, G.M.P., Campbell, A.G., Stafford, J.W.: NeXuS: delivering behavioural realism through intentional agents. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Active Media Technology (AMT 2005), pp. 481–486. IEEE Press, May 2005Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Campbell, A., Collier, R., Dragone, M., Görgü, L., Holz, T., OGrady, M., OHare, G., Sassu, A., Stafford, J.: Facilitating ubiquitous interaction using intelligent agents. In: Human-Computer Interaction: The Agency Perspective, pp. 303–326 (2012)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Campbell, A.G., Gorgu, L., Kroon, B., Lillis, D., Carr, D., O’Hare, G.M.P.: Giving mobile devices a sixth sense: introducing the sixth middleware for augmented reality applications. In: 2013 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality (ISMAR), pp. 245–246. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Abraham G. Campbell
    • 1
    Email author
  • Thomas Holz
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jonny Cosgrove
    • 2
  • Mike Harlick
    • 1
    • 2
  • Tadhg O’Sullivan
    • 2
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceUniversity College DublinBelfield, Dublin 4Ireland
  2. 2.MeetingRoomDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations