Monsurat Olaosebikan
Blessing Kolawole
Orit Shaer
ABSTRACT
Remote scientific collaborations have been pivotal in generating scientific discoveries and breakthroughs that accelerate research in many fields. Emerging VR applications for remote work, which utilize commercially available head-mounted displays (HMDs), offer the promise to enhance collaboration, through spatial and embodied experiences. However, there is little evidence on how professionals in general, and scientists in particular, could use existing commercial VR applications to support their cognitive and creative collaborative processes while exploring real-world data as part of day-to-day collaborative work. In this paper, we present findings from an empirical study with 14 coral reef scientists, examining how they chose to utilize available resources in existing virtual environments for their ongoing data-driven collaborative research. We shed light on scientists’ data organization practices, identify affordances unique to VR for supporting cognition in a collaborative setting, and highlight design requirements for supporting cognitive and creative collaboration processes in future tools.
- 2016. MeetinVR. https://www.meetinvr.com/. Accessed: 2021-9-7.Google Scholar
- 2020. Dear colleague letter: Future of international research collaboration post COVID-19 (nsf20132). https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2020/nsf20132/nsf20132.jsp. Accessed: 2021-9-2.Google Scholar
- 2021. Engage. https://engagevr.io/. Accessed: 2021-9-8.Google Scholar
- 2021. Rumii. https://www.dogheadsimulations.com/rumii. Accessed: 2021-9-8.Google Scholar
- Narges Ashtari, Andrea Bunt, Joanna McGrenere, Michael Nebeling, and Parmit K Chilana. 2020. Creating augmented and virtual reality applications: Current practices, challenges, and opportunities. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems. 1–13.Google ScholarDigital Library
- BadVR. 2020. Step Inside Your Data (R). https://badvr.com/. Accessed: 2020-11-11.Google Scholar
- Jeremy N Bailenson. 2021. Nonverbal overload: A theoretical argument for the causes of Zoom fatigue. Technology, Mind, and Behavior 2, 1 (2021).Google Scholar
- Robert Ball. 2010. Three Ways Larger Monitors Can Improve Productivity. Graziadio Business Report 13, 1 (2010).Google Scholar
- Robert Ball and Chris North. 2007. Realizing embodied interaction for visual analytics through large displays. Comput. Graph. 31, 3 (June 2007), 380–400.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Albert Bandura and Others. 2006. Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents 5, 1 (2006), 307–337.Google Scholar
- Andrea Batch, Andrew Cunningham, Maxime Cordeil, Niklas Elmqvist, Tim Dwyer, Bruce H Thomas, and Kim Marriott. 2020. There Is No Spoon: Evaluating Performance, Space Use, and Presence with Expert Domain Users in Immersive Analytics. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 26, 1 (Jan. 2020), 536–546.Google ScholarCross Ref
- L Michelle Bennett and Howard Gadlin. 2012. Collaboration and team science: from theory to practice. Journal of investigative medicine 60, 5 (2012), 768–775.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ayush Bhargava, Kathryn M Lucaites, Leah S Hartman, Hannah Solini, Jeffrey W Bertrand, Andrew C Robb, Christopher C Pagano, and Sabarish V Babu. 2020. Revisiting affordance perception in contemporary virtual reality. Virtual Reality 24, 4 (2020), 713–724.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jennifer Boyett, Darlla Duniphin, Frederick Miller, Mary Moon, and Bruna Varalli-Claypool. 2021. The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race.Google Scholar
- Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2012. Thematic analysis. (2012).Google Scholar
- Nicholas D Buchanan, David M Aslaner, Jeremy Adelstein, Duncan M MacKenzie, Loren E Wold, and Matthew W Gorr. 2021. Remote Work During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Making the Best of It. Physiology 36, 1 (Jan. 2021), 2–4.Google Scholar
- Andy Clark and David Chalmers. 1998. The Extended Mind. Analysis 58, 1 (Jan. 1998), 7–19.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A Cunningham, J D Hart, U Engelke, M Adcock, and others. 2021. Towards Embodied Interaction for Geospatial Energy Sector Analytics in Immersive Environments. Proceedings of the (2021).Google Scholar
- B Erol, D-S Lee, and J Hull. 2003. Multimodal summarization of meeting recordings. In 2003 International Conference on Multimedia and Expo. ICME ’03. Proceedings (Cat. No.03TH8698), Vol. 3. III–25.Google ScholarCross Ref
- James J Gibson. 2014. The ecological approach to visual perception: classic edition. Psychology Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Devamardeep Hayatpur, Haijun Xia, and Daniel Wigdor. 2020. DataHop: Spatial Data Exploration in Virtual Reality. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Virtual Event, USA) (UIST ’20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 818–828.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laura M Herman and Stefanie Hutka. 2019. Virtual Artistry: Virtual Reality Translations of Two-Dimensional Creativity. In Proceedings of the 2019 on Creativity and Cognition. 612–618.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ting-Wei Hsu, Ming-Han Tsai, Sabarish V Babu, Pei-Hsien Hsu, Hsuan-Ming Chang, Wen-Chieh Lin, and Jung-Hong Chuang. 2020. Design and Initial Evaluation of a VR based Immersive and Interactive Architectural Design Discussion System. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 363–371.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robert J K Jacob, Audrey Girouard, Leanne M Hirshfield, Michael S Horn, Orit Shaer, Erin Treacy Solovey, and Jamie Zigelbaum. 2008. Reality-based interaction: a framework for post-WIMP interfaces. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy) (CHI ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 201–210.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mikkel R Jakobsen and Kasper Hornbæk. 2015. Is Moving Improving? Some Effects of Locomotion in Wall-Display Interaction. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 4169–4178.Google Scholar
- Sasa Junuzovic, Kori Inkpen, John Tang, Mara Sedlins, and Kristie Fisher. 2012. To see or not to see: a study comparing four-way avatar, video, and audio conferencing for work. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on Supporting group work. 31–34.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Grit Laudel. 2001. Collaboration, creativity and rewards: why and how scientists collaborate. International Journal of Technology Management 22, 7-8(2001), 762–781.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jumin Lee, Jounghae Bang, and Hyunju Suh. 2018. Identifying affordance features in virtual reality: how do virtual reality games reinforce user experience?. In International Conference on Augmented Cognition. Springer, 383–394.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Andreas Luxenburger, Alexander Prange, Mohammad Mehdi Moniri, and Daniel Sonntag. 2016. MedicaLVR: towards medical remote collaboration using virtual reality. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing: Adjunct (Heidelberg, Germany) (UbiComp ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 321–324.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kim Marriott, Falk Schreiber, Tim Dwyer, Karsten Klein, Nathalie Henry Riche, Takayuki Itoh, Wolfgang Stuerzlinger, and Bruce H Thomas. 2018. Immersive Analytics. Springer.Google Scholar
- Carl Matthes, Tim Weissker, Emmanouil Angelidis, Alexander Kulik, Stephan Beck, Andre Kunert, Anton Frolov, Sandro Weber, Adrian Kreskowski, and Bernd Froehlich. 2019. The Collaborative Virtual Reality Neurorobotics Lab. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR). 1671–1674.Google Scholar
- Joshua McVeigh-Schultz, Anya Kolesnichenko, and Katherine Isbister. 2019. Shaping Pro-Social Interaction in VR: An Emerging Design Framework. In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Glasgow, Scotland Uk) (CHI ’19, Paper 564). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–12.Google ScholarDigital Library
- MeetinVR. 2016. Business meetings in VR better than in real life. https://www.meetinvr.com/. Accessed: 2021-8-30.Google Scholar
- Yanni Mei, Jie Li, Huib de Ridder, and Pablo Cesar. 2021. CakeVR: A Social Virtual Reality (VR) Tool for Co-designing Cakes. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Yokohama, Japan) (CHI ’21, Article 572). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–14.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sarah Morrison-Smith and Jaime Ruiz. 2020. Challenges and barriers in virtual teams: a literature review. SN Applied Sciences 2, 6 (May 2020), 1096.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Robby Nadler. 2020. Understanding “Zoom fatigue”: Theorizing spatial dynamics as third skins in computer-mediated communication. Computers and Composition 58 (2020), 102613.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nanome. 2020. Nanome. https://nanome.ai/nanome/. Accessed: 2020-11-11.Google Scholar
- Donald A Norman. 1988. The psychology of everyday things.Basic books.Google Scholar
- Judith S Olson, Erik C Hofer, Nathan Bos, Ann Zimmerman, Gary M Olson, Daniel Cooney, and Ixchel Faniel. 2008. A theory of remote scientific collaboration. Scientific collaboration on the internet(2008), 73–97.Google Scholar
- J S Olson and G M Olson. 2014. Bridging Distance: Empirical studies of distributed teams. Human-Computer Interaction and(2014).Google Scholar
- Sergio Orts-Escolano, Christoph Rhemann, Sean Fanello, Wayne Chang, Adarsh Kowdle, Yury Degtyarev, David Kim, Philip L Davidson, Sameh Khamis, Mingsong Dou, Vladimir Tankovich, Charles Loop, Qin Cai, Philip A Chou, Sarah Mennicken, Julien Valentin, Vivek Pradeep, Shenlong Wang, Sing Bing Kang, Pushmeet Kohli, Yuliya Lutchyn, Cem Keskin, and Shahram Izadi. 2016. Holoportation: Virtual 3D Teleportation in Real-time. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology (Tokyo, Japan) (UIST ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 741–754.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ye Pan and Kenny Mitchell. 2020. PoseMMR: A Collaborative Mixed Reality Authoring Tool for Character Animation. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces Abstracts and Workshops (VRW). 758–759.Google Scholar
- Annie Murphy Paul. 2021. The Extended Mind: The Power of Thinking Outside the Brain. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.Google Scholar
- Nikolaos Pellas, Stylianos Mystakidis, and Athanasios Christopoulos. 2021. A Systematic Literature Review on the User Experience Design for Game-Based Interventions via 3D Virtual Worlds in K-12 Education. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction 5, 6 (2021), 28.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Nikolaos Pellas, Stylianos Mystakidis, and Ioannis Kazanidis. 2021. Immersive Virtual Reality in K-12 and Higher Education: A systematic review of the last decade scientific literature. Virtual Reality 25, 3 (2021), 835–861.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Johanna Pirker, Andreas Dengel, Michael Holly, and Saeed Safikhani. 2020. Virtual reality in computer science education: A systematic review. In 26th ACM symposium on virtual reality software and technology. 1–8.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thammathip Piumsomboon, Youngho Lee, Gun Lee, and Mark Billinghurst. 2017. CoVAR: a collaborative virtual and augmented reality system for remote collaboration. In SIGGRAPH Asia 2017 Emerging Technologies(Bangkok, Thailand) (SA ’17, Article 3). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–2.Google Scholar
- Holger Regenbrecht, Michael Haller, Joerg Hauber, and Mark Billinghurst. 2006. Carpeno: interfacing remote collaborative virtual environments with table-top interaction. Virtual Real. 10, 2 (Sept. 2006), 95–107.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Evan F Risko and Sam J Gilbert. 2016. Cognitive Offloading. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20, 9 (Sept. 2016), 676–688.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Rose. 2021. Supersight: What augmented reality means for our lives, our work, and the way we imagine the future. BenBella Books, Inc.Google Scholar
- Kalle Saarikannas. 2019. Glue. https://www.glue.work. Accessed: 2021-9-8.Google Scholar
- Anthony Scavarelli, Ali Arya, and Robert J Teather. 2021. Virtual reality and augmented reality in social learning spaces: a literature review. Virtual Reality 25, 1 (2021), 257–277.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Helmut Schrom-Feiertag, Martin Stubenschrott, Georg Regal, Thomas Matyus, and Stefan Seer. 2020. An interactive and responsive virtual reality environment for participatory urban planning. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Simulation for Architecture and Urban Design SimAUD. 119–125.Google Scholar
- Sinem Semsioglu, Pelin Karaturhan, Saliha Akbas, and Asim Evren Yantac. 2021. Isles of Emotion: Emotionally Expressive Social Virtual Spaces for Reflection and Communication. In Creativity and Cognition. 1–10.Google Scholar
- Y Shen, S K Ong, and A Y C Nee. 2008. Collaborative design in 3D space. In Proceedings of The 7th ACM SIGGRAPH International Conference on Virtual-Reality Continuum and Its Applications in Industry (Singapore) (VRCAI ’08, Article 29). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–6.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Roger N Shepard and Jacqueline Metzler. 1971. Mental rotation of three-dimensional objects. Science 171, 3972 (1971), 701–703.Google Scholar
- Dong-Hee Shin. 2017. The role of affordance in the experience of virtual reality learning: Technological and affective affordances in virtual reality. Telematics and Informatics 34, 8 (2017), 1826–1836.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Spatial. 2020. Spatial: How Work Should Be. https://spatial.io/. Accessed: 2020-11-11.Google Scholar
- Jacob H Steffen, James E Gaskin, Thomas O Meservy, Jeffrey L Jenkins, and Iopa Wolman. 2019. Framework of affordances for virtual reality and augmented reality. Journal of Management Information Systems 36, 3 (2019), 683–729.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Susan U Stucky, Ben Shaw, and Wendy Ark. 2009. Virtual environments overview. Technical Report. IBM ALMADEN RESEARCH CENTER SAN JOSE CA.Google Scholar
- Desney S Tan, Darren Gergle, Peter Scupelli, and Randy Pausch. 2003. With similar visual angles, larger displays improve spatial performance. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, USA) (CHI ’03). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 217–224.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Desney S Tan, Jeanine K Stefanucci, Dennis R Proffitt, and Randy Pausch. 2001. The Infocockpit: providing location and place to aid human memory. In Proceedings of the 2001 workshop on Perceptive user interfaces (Orlando, Florida, USA) (PUI ’01). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–4.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jaime Teevan, B Hecht, and S Jaffe. 2020. The new future of work. Technical Report. Microsoft internal report.Google Scholar
- Barbara Tversky. 2019. Mind in motion: How action shapes thought. Hachette UK.Google Scholar
- Josh Urban Davis, Fraser Anderson, Merten Stroetzel, Tovi Grossman, and George Fitzmaurice. 2021. Designing Co-Creative AI for Virtual Environments. In Creativity and Cognition. 1–11.Google Scholar
- Peter Vorderer, Werner Wirth, Feliz R Gouveia, Frank Biocca, Timo Saari, Futz Jäncke, Saskia Böcking, Holger Schramm, Andre Gysbers, Tilo Hartmann, and Others. 2004. MEC spatial presence questionnaire (MEC-SPQ): Short documentation and instructions for application. Report to the European community, project presence: MEC (IST-2001-37661) 3 (2004), 5–3.Google Scholar
- Yun Wang, Ying Liu, Weiwei Cui, John Tang, Haidong Zhang, Doug Walston, and Dongmei Zhang. 2021. Returning to the Office During the COVID-19 Pandemic Recovery: Early Indicators from China. Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411763.3451685Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patrice L Weiss and Adam S Jessel. 1998. Virtual reality applications to work., 277–293 pages.Google Scholar
- Fumeng Yang, Jing Qian, Johannes Novotny, David Badre, Cullen Jackson, and David Laidlaw. 2020. A Virtual Reality Memory Palace Variant Aids Knowledge Retrieval from Scholarly Articles. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. PP (July 2020).Google Scholar
- Lingyao Yuan, Alan Dennis, Kai Riemer, 2019. Crossing the uncanny valley? Understanding affinity, trustworthiness, and preference for more realistic virtual humans in immersive environments. In Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.Google Scholar
- Hamed Zaer, Wei Fan, Dariusz Orlowski, Andreas N Glud, Anne S M Andersen, M Bret Schneider, John R Adler, Albrecht Stroh, and Jens C H Sørensen. 2020. A Perspective of International Collaboration Through Web-Based Telecommunication-Inspired by COVID-19 Crisis. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 14 (Nov. 2020), 577465.Google Scholar
- Chi Zhang, Wei Zeng, and Ligang Liu. 2021. UrbanVR: An immersive analytics system for context-aware urban design. Comput. Graph. 99 (Oct. 2021), 128–138.Google Scholar
- Sisi Zhang and Antoni B Moore. 2014. The Usability of Online Geographic Virtual Reality for Urban Planning. In Innovations in 3D Geo-Information Sciences, Umit Isikdag (Ed.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 225–242.Google Scholar
Recommendations
Embodied Notes: A Cognitive Support Tool For Remote Scientific Collaboration in VR
CHI EA '22: Extended Abstracts of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsScientists collaborate remotely across institutions, countries and continents. However, collaborating remotely is challenging. Video-conferencing tools used for meetings limit the cognitive practices that collaborators can partake in. In virtual ...
BeHere: a VR/SAR remote collaboration system based on virtual replicas sharing gesture and avatar in a procedural task
AbstractIn this paper, we focus on the significance of remote collaboration using virtual replicas, avatar, and gesture on a procedural task in industry; thus, we present a Virtual Reality (VR)/Spatial Augmented Reality (SAR) remote collaboration system, ...
Immersive Collaborative VR Application Design: A Case Study of Agile Virtual Design Over Distance
Due to the recent COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a renewed interest in expanding the capabilities of remote collaboration tools. Studies show the importance of noticing peripheral cues, pointing to or manipulating real-world objects in face-to-face ...
Comments