Virtual reality as an empirical research tool - Exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model

Abstract Virtual reality (VR) allows for highly-detailed observations, accurate behavior measurements, and systematic environmental manipulations under controlled laboratory circumstances. It therefore has the potential to be a valuable research tool for studies in human–environment interaction, such as building usability studies and post- as well as pre-occupancy building evaluation in architectural research and practice. In order to fully understand VR as a valid environmental representation, it is essential to examine to what extent not only user cognition and behavior, but also users' experiences are analogous in real and virtual environments. This work presents a multi-method approach with two studies that investigated the correspondence of building users' experience in a real conference center and a highly-detailed virtual model of the same building as well as a third study that virtually implemented systematic redesigns to the existing building layout. In the context of reporting users' experiential building evaluations, this article discusses the potential, prerequisites and opportunities for the implementation of virtual environments as an empirical research tool in the field of human–environment interaction. Based on quantitative data, few statistically significant differences between ratings of the real and the virtual building were found; however analyses based on qualitative data revealed differences relating to atmospherics. The main conclusion of this article is that VR has a strong potential to be used as an empirical research tool in psychological and architectural research and that future studies could supplement behavioral validation.

[1]  Nigel Foreman,et al.  Transfer of Spatial Information from a Virtual to a Real Environment , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[2]  R. Kirk.  Practical Significance: A Concept Whose Time Has Come , 1996 .

[3]  Ruth Dalton,et al.  Building circulation typology and Space Syntax predictive measures , 2015 .

[4]  Martin Brösamle,et al.  What Constitutes a Main Staircase? Evidence from Wayfinding Behaviour, Architectural Expertise and Space Syntax Methods , 2009 .

[5]  Maria Roussou,et al.  Design and Evaluation of a Real-World Virtual Environment for Architecture and Urban Planning , 2007, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[6]  Christoph Hölscher,et al.  Impact of Regionalization and Detour on Ad-hoc Path Choice , 2008, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[7]  Andrew Ramsden,et al.  Using Word Clouds in Teaching and Learning , 2008 .

[8]  Ipke Wachsmuth,et al.  Frischer Wind in der CAVE: Realisierung und Evaluation einer multimodalen virtuellen Welt , 2013 .

[9]  Ava Fatah gen. Schieck,et al.  ARTHUR: A Collaborative Augmented Environment for Architectural Design and Urban Planning , 2004, J. Virtual Real. Broadcast..

[10]  Jan M. Wiener,et al.  From Space Syntax to Space Semantics: A Behaviorally and Perceptually Oriented Methodology for the Efficient Description of the Geometry and Topology of Environments , 2008 .

[11]  Steffen Werner,et al.  The Role of Spatial Reference Frames in Architecture , 2004 .

[12]  Gerhard Strube,et al.  Everyday navigation in real and virtual environments informed by semantic knowledge , 2011, CogSci.

[13]  John H. Bailey,et al.  Virtual spaces and real world places: transfer of route knowledge , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[14]  Linda Steg,et al.  Physical features, coherence and positive outcomes of person–environment interactions: A virtual reality study , 2014 .

[15]  Jon May,et al.  Improving Dental Experiences by Using Virtual Reality Distraction: A Simulation Study , 2014, PloS one.

[16]  Anthony E. Richardson,et al.  Spatial abilities at different scales: Individual differences in aptitude-test performance and spatial-layout learning , 2006 .

[17]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Subjective responses to simulated and real environments: a comparison , 2003 .

[18]  Alexander Toet,et al.  Is a Dark Virtual Environment Scary? , 2009, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

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

[20]  Bob G. Witmer,et al.  Judging Perceived and Traversed Distance in Virtual Environments , 1998, Presence.

[21]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Navigating Buildings in "Desk-Top" Virtual Environments: Experimental Investigations Using Extended Navigational Experience , 1997 .

[22]  C. R. Larsen,et al.  The efficacy of virtual reality simulation training in laparoscopy: a systematic review of randomized trials , 2012, Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica.

[23]  Christine J. Ziemer,et al.  Estimating distance in real and virtual environments: Does order make a difference? , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[24]  R. Dalton.  The Secret Is To Follow Your Nose , 2001 .

[25]  Mikael Johansson,et al.  Users' evaluation of a virtual reality architectural model compared with the experience of the completed building , 2006 .

[26]  C. Osgood,et al.  The Measurement of Meaning , 1958 .

[27]  Rudy Darken,et al.  Wayfinding strategies and behaviors in large virtual worlds , 1996, CHI.

[28]  Tom Tullis,et al.  Measuring the User Experience, Second Edition: Collecting, Analyzing, and Presenting Usability Metrics , 2013 .

[29]  M. Hui,et al.  The Ecological Validity of Photographic Slides and Videotapes in Simulating the Service Setting , 1992 .

[30]  Robert G. Hershberger,et al.  Environmental aesthetics: Predicting user responses to buildings , 1988 .

[31]  G. Keppel,et al.  Design and Analysis: A Researcher's Handbook , 1976 .

[32]  Aga Skorupka,et al.  Comparing Human Wayfinding Behavior in Real and Virtual Environment , 2009 .

[33]  David Canter,et al.  A technique for the subjective appraisal of buildings , 1970 .

[34]  Daniel C. Cliburn,et al.  Dynamic landmark placement as a navigation aid in virtual worlds , 2007, VRST '07.

[35]  Christoph Hölscher,et al.  Challenges in Multilevel Wayfinding: A Case Study with the Space Syntax Technique , 2012 .

[36]  M. Benedikt,et al.  To Take Hold of Space: Isovists and Isovist Fields , 1979 .

[37]  Markus Knauff,et al.  Up the down staircase : Wayfinding strategies in multi-level buildings , 2006 .

[38]  J. Loomis,et al.  Immersive virtual environment technology as a basic research tool in psychology , 1999, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[39]  Ferran Argelaguet,et al.  See-through techniques for referential awareness in collaborative virtual reality , 2011, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[40]  Michael J. Singer,et al.  Measuring Presence in Virtual Environments: A Presence Questionnaire , 1998, Presence.

[41]  Yvonne de Kort,et al.  Virtual Laboratories: Comparability of Real and Virtual Environments for Environmental Psychology , 2003, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[42]  Ruth Dalton,et al.  Aesthetic and Emotional Appraisal of the Seattle Public Library and its relation to spatial configuration , 2013 .

[43]  Wijnand A. IJsselsteijn,et al.  Using Behavioral Realism to Estimate Presence: A Study of the Utility of Postural Responses to Motion Stimuli , 2000, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[44]  Victoria Interrante,et al.  Distance Perception in Immersive Virtual Environments, Revisited , 2006, VR.