Comparing Collaboration Fidelity between VR, MR and Video Conferencing Systems: The Effects of Visual Communication Media Fidelity on Collaboration

Video/audio conferencing systems have been used extensively for remote collaboration over many years. Recently, virtual and mixed reality (VR/MR) systems have started to show great potential as communication media for remote collaboration. Prior studies revealed that the creation of common ground between discourse participants is crucial for collaboration and that grounding techniques change with the communication medium. However, it is difficult to find previous research that compares VR and MR communication system performances with video conferencing systems regarding the creation of common ground for collaborative problem solving. On the other hand, prior studies have found that display fidelity and interaction fidelity had significant effects on performance-intensive individual tasks in virtual reality. Fidelity in VR can be defined as the degree of objective accuracy with which the real-world is represented by the virtual world. However, to date, fidelity for collaborative tasks in VR/MR has not been defined or studied much. In this paper, we compare five different communication media for the establishment of common ground in collaborative problem-solving tasks: Webcam, headband camera, VR, MR, and audio-only conferencing systems. We analyzed these communication media with respect to collaborative fidelity components which we defined. For the experiments, we utilized two different types of collaborative tasks: a 2D Tangram puzzle and a 3D Soma cube puzzle. The experimental results show that the traditional Webcam performed better than the other media in the 2D task, while the headband camera performed better in the 3D task. In terms of collaboration fidelity, these results were somehow predictable, although there was a little difference between our expectations and the results.

[1]  Hirotaka Osawa,et al.  Social Glasses: Simulating Interactive Gaze for Visually Impaired People in Face-to-Face Communication , 2019, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact..

[2]  Tomás Urbánek,et al.  Collaborative Immersive Virtual Environments for Education in Geography , 2018, ISPRS Int. J. Geo Inf..

[3]  Martin Feick,et al.  Mixed-Reality for Object-Focused Remote Collaboration , 2018, UIST.

[4]  Vincent Aleven,et al.  Student Learning Benefits of a Mixed-Reality Teacher Awareness Tool in AI-Enhanced Classrooms , 2018, AIED.

[5]  Ehud Sharlin,et al.  Perspective on and Re-orientation of Physical Proxies in Object-Focused Remote Collaboration , 2018, CHI.

[6]  Robert W. Lindeman,et al.  Mini-Me: An Adaptive Avatar for Mixed Reality Remote Collaboration , 2018, CHI.

[7]  Itthisek Nilkhamhang,et al.  Command-Based Object Manipulation in Virtual Reality for Visualization and Design Tasks , 2018, ICDSP 2018.

[8]  Selim Balcisoy,et al.  Low-fidelity prototyping with simple collaborative tabletop computer-aided design systems , 2018, Comput. Graph..

[9]  Daniel Mendes,et al.  Using custom transformation axes for mid-air manipulation of 3D virtual objects , 2017, VRST.

[10]  Giulio Jacucci,et al.  Total Immersion: Designing for Affective Symbiosis in a Virtual Reality Game with Haptics, Biosensors, and Emotive Agents , 2016, Symbiotic.

[11]  Tobias Höllerer,et al.  Evaluating wide-field-of-view augmented reality with mixed reality simulation , 2016, 2016 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR).

[12]  Malte F. Jung,et al.  Crystallize: An Immersive, Collaborative Game for Second Language Learning , 2016, CSCW.

[13]  Eric D. Ragan,et al.  Effects of Field of View and Visual Complexity on Virtual Reality Training Effectiveness for a Visual Scanning Task , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[14]  Bilge Mutlu,et al.  Can You See Me Now?: How Field of View Affects Collaboration in Robotic Telepresence , 2015, CHI.

[15]  Bilge Mutlu,et al.  Handheld or Handsfree?: Remote Collaboration via Lightweight Head-Mounted Displays and Handheld Devices , 2015, CSCW.

[16]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Effects of VR System Fidelity on Analyzing Isosurface Visualization of Volume Datasets , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[17]  付伶俐 打磨Using Language,倡导新理念 , 2014 .

[18]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Using Visual Information for Grounding and Awareness in Collaborative Tasks , 2012, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[19]  Roel Vertegaal,et al.  TeleHuman: effects of 3d perspective on gaze and pose estimation with a life-size cylindrical telepresence pod , 2012, CHI.

[20]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Evaluating Display Fidelity and Interaction Fidelity in a Virtual Reality Game , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[21]  Thierry Duval,et al.  Collaborative exploration in a multi-scale shared virtual environment , 2012, 2012 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI).

[22]  Ryan P. McMahan Exploring the Effects of Higher-Fidelity Display and Interaction for Virtual Reality Games , 2011 .

[23]  Xiangyu Wang,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of Mixed Reality-Based Virtual Environments in Collaborative Design , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[24]  The inclusion of other in the self (ios) scale. , 2010 .

[25]  Jane Yung-jen Hsu,et al.  Touching the void: direct-touch interaction for intangible displays , 2010, CHI.

[26]  Gabor Sziebig Achieving total immersion: technology trends behind augmented reality-a survey , 2009 .

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

[28]  Katerina Mania,et al.  The effect of visual and interaction fidelity on spatial cognition in immersive virtual environments , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[29]  Paul Smaglik,et al.  A dose of reality , 2004, Nature.

[30]  David D. Woods,et al.  Envisioning human-robot coordination in future operations , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[31]  H. H. Clark,et al.  Speaking while monitoring addressees for understanding , 2004 .

[32]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Visual Information as a Conversational Resource in Collaborative Physical Tasks , 2003, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[33]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Effects of head-mounted and scene-oriented video systems on remote collaboration on physical tasks , 2003, CHI '03.

[34]  A. Monk,et al.  A Look Is Worth a Thousand Words: Full Gaze Awareness in Video-Mediated Conversation , 2002 .

[35]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  --Understanding Effects of Proximity on Collaboration : Implications for Technologies to Support Remote Collaborative Work , 2001 .

[36]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  Coordination of communication: effects of shared visual context on collaborative work , 2000, CSCW '00.

[37]  Lisa C. Thomas,et al.  Effects of Display Frames of Reference on Spatial Judgments and Change Detection , 2000 .

[38]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[39]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .