Figure 1 - uploaded by Ilona Heldal
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
This study examines pairs of subjects who used networked immersive projection technology systems to collaborate on five tasks over an extended period of time (210+ minutes). The aim was to compare zero history and mutual history partners, to examine how their experience changed over time, and compare their experience of different tasks. Analysis yi...
Similar publications
This study examines pairs of subjects who used networked immersive projection technology systems to collaborate on five tasks over an extended period of time (210+ minutes). The aim was to compare zero history and mutual history partners, to examine how their experience changed over time, and compare their experience of different tasks. Analysis yi...
This study examines pairs of subjects who used networked immersive projection technology systems to collaborate on five tasks over an extended period of time (210+ minutes). The aim was to compare zero history and mutual history partners, to examine how their experience changed over time, and compare their experience of different tasks. Analysis yi...
Citations
... For reasons of space, only key features of the two studies are presented here; details of the studies (Tromp, Steed, & Wilson, 2003;Steed, Spante, Heldal, Axelsson, & Schroeder, 2003) and a summary of the main usability issues can be found in Tromp (2001) and Heldal (2004). In this paper, the focus is not on making recommendations for specific usability guidelines (although several usability issues will be mentioned in passing as we discuss examples of our methods). ...
This paper describes two methods for analyzing interactions in collaborative virtual environments (CVEs): one whereby quantitative data are captured, interaction is categorized into a number of activities, and statistical analysis can be performed on frequencies and sequences of events. The other is based on the transcription of individual fragments of interaction, which are analyzed in terms of their key dynam- ics. The two methods each have their strengths and weaknesses, especially in terms of generalizability and the lessons we can derive from them. Both also point to dif- ferent problems that need to be addressed in methods for analyzing interaction— such analysis being, in turn, a precondition for improving the usability of CVEs. The paper concludes with an argument for a combination of the two methods, and some reflections about the relationship between the analysis of interaction and the usability of CVEs.
Usability evaluation methods and guidelines are promising techniques to obtain higher productivity, better systems and applications, and more satisfied users. The benefits can also be translated into economic terms that make usability evaluation attractive for a wider context. However, with the appearance of new computer systems the evaluation methods and guidelines require continuous revision. Since collaborative virtual environments [11] are rather novel and extremely complex systems, there are relatively few investigations of defining new or revised methods for evaluating their usability. The goal of this work is to sketch a usability evaluation method for CVEs through examining the main processes that occur during collaboration: the social interaction (SI), the interaction via technology (IT), and the chosen techniques to reach the goals (TG). The aim of this paper is to investigate how present literatures handle the processes and build a theoretical framework to analyze them further. Moreover to discuss how the interruptions observed during one of these processes affect the other ones and the experiences in general. The focus is on multiple users' collaboration and on using different distributed systems and applications.
