Advertisement

Perception of Spatial Relations and of Coexistence with Virtual Agents

  • Mohammad Obaid
  • Radosław Niewiadomski
  • Catherine Pelachaud
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6895)

Abstract

This paper focuses on the user’s perception of virtual agents embedded in real and virtual worlds. In particular, we analyze the perception of spatial relations and the perception of coexistence. For this purpose, we measure the user’s voice compensation which is one of the human automatic behaviors to their surrounding environment.

The results of our evaluation study reveal that people compensate their voice according to the distance during the interaction with both augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) based agents. Secondly, in AR-based scenario users perceive stronger the distance between them and the virtual agent. On the other hand, the results do not show any significant differences regarding the notion of coexistence of the user. Finally, we discuss our results in the context of sense of presence in interaction with virtual agent in AR applications.

Keywords

Augmented Reality Immersive Virtual Reality Virtual Agents 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Warren, R.M.: Measurement of sensory intensity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 175–189 (1981)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Witmer, B.G., Singer, M.J.: Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 7, 225–240 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Slater, M., Lotto, B., Arnold, M.M., Sanchez-Vives, M.V.: How we experience immersive virtual environments: the concept of presence and its measurement. Anuario de Psicologa 40, 193–210 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Llobera, J., Spanlang, B., Ruffini, G., Slater, M.: Proxemics with multiple dynamic characters in an immersive virtual environment. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 8, 3:1–3:12 (2010)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Freeman, J., Avons, S., Meddis, R., Pearson, D.E., Ijsselsteijn, W.: Using behavioral realism to estimate presence: A study of the utility of postural responses to motion stimuli. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments 9(2), 149–164 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Healey, E.C., Jones, R., Berky, R.: Effects of perceived listeners on speakers? vocal intensity. Journal of Voice: Official Journal of the Voice Foundation 11(1), 67–73 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dow, S., Mehta, M., Harmon, E., MacIntyre, B., Mateas, M.: Presence and engagement in an interactive drama. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference CHI 2007, pp. 1475–1484. ACM, New York (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tang, A., Biocca, F., Lim, L.: Comparing differences in presence during social interaction in augmented reality versus virtual reality environments: An exploratory study. In: Raya, M.A., Solaz, B.R. (eds.) Proceedings of PRESENCE 2004, 7th Annual International Workshop on Presence, pp. 204–208 (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Niewiadomski, R., Bevacqua, E., Le, Q.A., Obaid, M., Looser, J., Pelachaud, C.: Cross media agent platform. To appear in: Proceedings of Web3D ACM Conference, ACM, New York (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Reeves, B., Nass, C.: The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, New York (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Obaid
    • 1
  • Radosław Niewiadomski
    • 2
  • Catherine Pelachaud
    • 2
  1. 1.Human Interface Technology Lab New Zealand (HITLab NZ)University of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  2. 2.CNRS-LTCITelecom ParisTechParisFrance

Personalised recommendations