Impact of device, context of use, and content on viewing experience of 360-degree tourism video

With the rapid advancement and development of emerging technologies, more in-depth understanding of user interactions and experiences are needed. In this study, we explored the reactions, impressions, and emotions elicited by a 360-degree video that markets an airport and local attractions for a distant destination. Differences in presence and viewing experiences on a mobile phone and VR headset were examined in two contexts: a semi-public setting and a private setting. Our results showed a preference for the private setting, not only because of distractions present in the semi-public location, but also due to social and cultural anxieties felt by participants. Furthermore, we suggest a set of guidelines that relate to the experiential elements of viewing 360-degree videos that can aid designers and researchers in the creation of unique content and novel services, in which we recommend establishing an emotional connection, providing engagement, guiding viewer attention, encouraging exploration, understanding the appropriate viewing context, and avoiding technical flaws.

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

[2]  E. Goffman.  Behavior in Public Places , 1963 .

[3]  Jukka Häkkinen,et al.  Profiles of the evaluators: impact of psychographic variables on the consumer-oriented quality assessment of mobile television , 2008, Electronic Imaging.

[4]  S. J. Backman,et al.  Exploring the Implications of Virtual Reality Technology in Tourism Marketing: An Integrated Research Framework , 2016 .

[5]  Holger Regenbrecht,et al.  The Experience of Presence: Factor Analytic Insights , 2001, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[6]  Mariano Alcañiz Raya,et al.  Affective Interactions Using Virtual Reality: The Link between Presence and Emotions , 2007, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[7]  Martin Kraus,et al.  A comparison of head-mounted and hand-held displays for 360° videos with focus on attitude and behavior change , 2016, MindTrek.

[8]  Bill Nichols,et al.  Engaging Cinema: An Introduction to Film Studies , 2010 .

[9]  Heli Väätäjä,et al.  Dimensions of Context Affecting User Experience in Mobile Work , 2009, INTERACT.

[10]  June Lu,et al.  Personal innovativeness, social influences and adoption of wireless Internet services via mobile technology , 2005, J. Strateg. Inf. Syst..

[11]  Rosa María Baños,et al.  Immersion and Emotion: Their Impact on the Sense of Presence , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[12]  Johannes Schöning,et al.  It's All Around You: Exploring 360° Video Viewing Experiences on Mobile Devices , 2017, ACM Multimedia.

[13]  Jason Mittell.  Narrative Complexity in Contemporary American Television , 2006 .

[14]  Carl Machover,et al.  Virtual reality , 1994, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[15]  Michele D. Dickey.  Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can inform instructional design , 2005 .

[16]  Roderick Murray-Smith,et al.  A Dose of Reality: Overcoming Usability Challenges in VR Head-Mounted Displays , 2015, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[17]  Marc Hassenzahl,et al.  User experience - a research agenda , 2006, Behav. Inf. Technol..

[18]  M. Thüring,et al.  Usability, aesthetics and emotions in human–technology interaction , 2007 .

[19]  Jonathan Freeman,et al.  A Cross-Media Presence Questionnaire: The ITC-Sense of Presence Inventory , 2001, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[20]  Mel Slater,et al.  Taking steps: the influence of a walking technique on presence in virtual reality , 1995, TCHI.

[21]  P. Robinson,et al.  Destination marketing: The use of technology since the millennium , 2017 .

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

[23]  Daniel R. Fesenmaier,et al.  Searching for Experiences , 2002 .

[24]  Steven C. Rockwell,et al.  The effect of communication, writing, and technology apprehension on likelihood to use new communication technologies , 1997 .

[25]  Stefania Serafin,et al.  Immersion revisited: A review of existing definitions of immersion and their relation to different theories of presence , 2016 .

[26]  Anind K. Dey,et al.  Understanding and Using Context , 2001, Personal and Ubiquitous Computing.

[27]  Mel Slater,et al.  A note on presence terminology , 2003 .

[28]  F. Biocca,et al.  Communication in the age of virtual reality , 1995 .

[29]  Joanne Moore,et al.  Was I There?: Impact of Platform and Headphones on 360 Video Immersion , 2017, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[30]  K. K. Ramakrishnan,et al.  Characterization of 360-degree Videos , 2017, VR/AR Network@SIGCOMM.

[31]  Markku Turunen,et al.  Assisting immersive virtual reality development with user experience design approach , 2017, MindTrek.

[32]  Daniel A. Guttentag.  Virtual reality: Applications and implications for tourism , 2010 .

[33]  Satu Jumisko-Pyykkö,et al.  A Hybrid Method for Quality Evaluation in the Context of Use for Mobile (3D) Television , 2011, Multimedia Tools and Applications.

[34]  Satu Jumisko-Pyykkö,et al.  Framing the Context of Use for Mobile HCI , 2010, Int. J. Mob. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[35]  Ramiro Gonçalves,et al.  A multisensory virtual experience model for thematic tourism: A Port wine tourism application proposal , 2017 .

[36]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough? , 2007, Computer.

[37]  Robert S. Kennedy,et al.  Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. , 1993 .

[38]  Carolina Cruz-Neira,et al.  Surround-Screen Projection-Based Virtual Reality: The Design and Implementation of the CAVE , 2023 .

[39]  Florian Schweiger,et al.  The Geometry of Storytelling: Theatrical Use of Space for 360-degree Videos and Virtual Reality , 2017, CHI.