Social acceptability of virtual reality in public spaces: experiential factors and design recommendations

With the latest advancements in Virtual Reality (VR), the possible use of VR devices in public and social contexts has increased. Since the use of VR typically requires wearing a Head-Mounted Display (HMD), the user is not able to see others - the spectators - present in the same context. This may lead to a decrease of social acceptability of VR by both the users and the spectators. We conducted a field experiment to explore what are the experiential factors of the users of VR (N=10) and spectators of VR use (N=30). We found experiential factors for the users to be adjustment of interaction, uninterruptable immersion, un-intrusive communication, freedom to switch between realities, sense of safety, physical privacy, shared experience, and sense of belonging. For the spectators, the main factors are shared experience, enticing curiosity, feeling normal, and sense of safety. We then run three sessions with user experience (UX) experts (N=9) to create a set of design recommendations for socially acceptable VR. The resulting ten recommendations provide a holistic view to designing acceptable experiences for VR in public spaces.

[1]  C. Edwards.  Wearable computing struggles for social acceptance , 2003 .

[2]  Jason Jerald,et al.  The VR Book: Human-Centered Design for Virtual Reality , 2015 .

[3]  Mohamed Khamis,et al.  TransparentHMD: revealing the HMD user's face to bystanders , 2017, MUM.

[4]  Anthony Tang,et al.  Lessons learned: game design for large public displays , 2008, DIMEA.

[5]  Elizabeth B.-N. Sanders,et al.  A framework for organizing the tools and techniques of participatory design , 2010, PDC '10.

[6]  William R. Sherman,et al.  Understanding Virtual RealityInterface, Application, and Design , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[7]  Kasper Hornbæk,et al.  Virtual reality studies outside the laboratory , 2017, VRST.

[8]  Heli Väätäjä,et al.  Journalism in virtual reality: opportunities and future research challenges , 2016, MindTrek.

[9]  Andrea Bunt,et al.  Performer vs. observer: whose comfort level should we consider when examining the social acceptability of input modalities for head-worn display? , 2018, VRST.

[10]  Mohamed Khamis,et al.  Public HMDs: Modeling and Understanding User Behavior around Public Head-Mounted Displays , 2018, PerDis.

[11]  Florian Alt,et al.  Feeling alone in public: investigating the influence of spatial layout on users' VR experience , 2018, NordiCHI.

[12]  Cameron S. Miner,et al.  Digital jewelry: wearable technology for everyday life , 2001, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[13]  Valentin Schwind.  On the Need for Standardized Methods to Study the Social Acceptability of Emerging Technologies , 2018 .

[14]  Fred D. Davis.  A technology acceptance model for empirically testing new end-user information systems : theory and results , 1985 .

[15]  Susanne Boll,et al.  (Un)Acceptable!?!: Re-thinking the Social Acceptability of Emerging Technologies , 2018, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[16]  Stephen A. Brewster,et al.  Usable gestures for mobile interfaces: evaluating social acceptability , 2010, CHI.

[17]  Verena Distler,et al.  Acceptability and Acceptance of Autonomous Mobility on Demand: The Impact of an Immersive Experience , 2018, CHI.

[18]  Stephen Brewster,et al.  Using Field Experiments to Evaluate Mobile Guides , 2004 .

[19]  Khubaib Amjad Alam,et al.  Measuring the Impact of Changing Technology in Mobile Phones on User Device Interaction Based on a Qualitative Survey , 2017, ICEEG 2017.

[20]  Helvi Kyngäs,et al.  The qualitative content analysis process. , 2008, Journal of advanced nursing.

[21]  Kouta Minamizawa,et al.  FrontFace: facilitating communication between HMD users and outsiders using front-facing-screen HMDs , 2017, MobileHCI.

[22]  Jun Rekimoto,et al.  JackIn space: designing a seamless transition between first and third person view for effective telepresence collaborations , 2017, AH.

[23]  Gifford Cheung,et al.  Starcraft from the stands: understanding the game spectator , 2011, CHI.

[24]  Liwei Chan,et al.  ShareSpace: Facilitating Shared Use of the Physical Space by both VR Head-Mounted Display and External Users , 2018, UIST.

[25]  Halley Profita,et al.  The AT Effect: How Disability Affects the Perceived Social Acceptability of Head-Mounted Display Use , 2016, CHI.

[26]  Niels Henze,et al.  Virtual reality on the go?: a study on social acceptance of VR glasses , 2018, MobileHCI Adjunct.

[27]  Susanne Boll,et al.  Beyond LED Status Lights - Design Requirements of Privacy Notices for Body-worn Cameras , 2018, TEI.

[28]  Gordon B. Davis,et al.  User Acceptance of Information Technology: Toward a Unified View , 2003, MIS Q..

[29]  Frank Vetere,et al.  Differentiated Participation in Social Videogaming , 2015, OZCHI.

[30]  M. Hassenzahl,et al.  Designing Moments of Meaning and Pleasure. Experience Design and Happiness , 2013 .