Take a Walk : Evaluating Movement Types for Data Visualization in Immersive Virtual Reality

3D virtual reality (VR) technology has long promised to provide new ways to view and interact with abstract data, but it has been held back by technological limitations and the difficulty of moving through 3D environments. Recent innovations in VR technology overcome previous constraints, but existing research has had mixed insights into the optimal types of virtual movement for task performance. We conducted a two-factor between subjects (N = 20) pilot experiment testing two types of viewpoint interaction for exploring a 3D scatterplot in a virtual environment developed using consumer-grade VR hardware and software tools. In one condition users changed their viewpoint by physically walking around the 3D scatterplot, the system matching their physical location to their virtual one. In the other users stood still and rotated the scatterplot with a controller. An exploratory analysis of plot-specific memory tasks revealed that individual differences played a strong role depending on the condition. In particular, low spatial ability users were better supported by walking interaction rather than interaction using a controller. The pilot experiment revealed potentials for improvements in the chosen measures, and the findings will inform the design of future larger-scale evaluations.

[1]  Rosane Minghim,et al.  A Framework for Exploring Multidimensional Data with 3D Projections , 2011, Comput. Graph. Forum.

[2]  Kai Lawonn,et al.  3D Regression Heat Map Analysis of Population Study Data , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[3]  Robert F. Easley,et al.  Research Note - How Does Personality Matter? Relating the Five-Factor Model to Technology Acceptance and Use , 2008, Inf. Syst. Res..

[4]  Michael J. McGuffin,et al.  The Impact of Interactivity on Comprehending 2D and 3D Visualizations of Movement Data , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[5]  John T. Stasko,et al.  Low-level components of analytic activity in information visualization , 2005, IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization, 2005. INFOVIS 2005..

[6]  Timothy P. McNamara,et al.  Do We Need to Walk for Effective Virtual Reality Navigation? Physical Rotations Alone May Suffice , 2010, Spatial Cognition.

[7]  Sarah H. Creem-Regehr,et al.  Spatial updating of virtual displays , 2004 .

[8]  Tamara Munzner,et al.  Empirical Guidance on Scatterplot and Dimension Reduction Technique Choices , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[9]  Jeffrey S. Norris,et al.  Immersive and collaborative data visualization using virtual reality platforms , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data).

[10]  Tobias Isenberg,et al.  Reimagining the Scientific Visualization Interaction Paradigm , 2013, Computer.

[11]  Henrik R. Nagel,et al.  Immersive Visual Data Mining: The 3DVDM Approach , 2008, Visual Data Mining.

[12]  Huahai Yang,et al.  Personality as a Predictor of User Strategy: How Locus of Control Affects Search Strategies on Tree Visualizations , 2015, CHI.

[13]  Danielle Oprean,et al.  Immersive Analytics for Multi-objective Dynamic Integrated Climate-Economy (DICE) Models , 2016, ISS Companion.

[14]  Steven A. Marchette,et al.  Multiple Views of Space: Continuous Visual Flow Enhances Small-Scale Spatial Learning , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[15]  M. Peters,et al.  A Redrawn Vandenberg and Kuse Mental Rotations Test - Different Versions and Factors That Affect Performance , 1995, Brain and Cognition.

[16]  Pierre Dragicevic,et al.  Rolling the Dice: Multidimensional Visual Exploration using Scatterplot Matrix Navigation , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.