Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorKeighery, Conor
dc.contributor.authorFlynn, Ronan
dc.contributor.authorMurray, Siobhan
dc.contributor.authorBrennan, Sean
dc.contributor.authorMurray, Niall
dc.date.accessioned2019-04-18T14:19:47Z
dc.date.available2019-04-18T14:19:47Z
dc.date.copyright2017
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.citationFeighery, Conor et al (2017). Comparing user QoE via physiological and interaction measurements of immersive AR and VR speech and language therapy applications. ACM Multimedia 2017, October 23-27 Mountainview, CA, USA. DOI: 10.1145/3126686.3126747en_US
dc.identifier.isbn9781450354165
dc.identifier.urihttps://research.thea.ie/handle/20.500.12065/2638
dc.descriptionConference Paper
dc.description.abstractVirtual reality (VR)1and augmented reality (AR) applications are gaining significant attention in industry and academia as potential avenues to support truly immersive and interactive multimedia experiences. Understanding the user perceived quality of immersive multimedia experiences is critical to the success of these technologies. However, this is a multidimensional and multifactorial problem. The user quality of experience (QoE) is influenced by human, context and system factors. Attempts to understand QoE via multimedia quality assessment has typically involved users reporting their experiences via post-test questionnaires. More recently, efforts have been made to automatically collect objective metrics that can quantitatively reflect user QoE in terms of physiological measurement methods. In this context, this paper presents a novel comparison of objective quality measures of immersive AR and VR applications through physiological: (electrodermal activity (EDA) and heart rate (HR)); and interaction (response times (RT), incorrect responses, and miss-click) metrics. The analysis shows consistency in terms of physiological ratings and miss-click metrics between the AR and VR groups. Interestingly, the AR group reported lower response times and less incorrect responses compared to the VR group. The difference between the AR and VR groups was statistically significant for the incorrect response metric and in 45.5% of the cases tested for response times metric, they were statistically significant with 95% confidence levels.en_US
dc.formatPDFen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherACMen_US
dc.relation.ispartofACM Multimedia 2017en_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ie/*
dc.subjectInteractive multimediaen_US
dc.subjectAugmented realityen_US
dc.subjectHuman-centred computingen_US
dc.subjectUser interfaces (Computer systems)en_US
dc.titleComparing user QoE via physiological and interaction measurements of immersive AR and VR speech and language therapy applications.en_US
dc.typeBook chapteren_US
dc.description.peerreviewyesen_US
dc.identifier.orcidhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5919-0596
dc.rights.accessOpen Accessen_US
dc.subject.departmentElectronics, Computer & Software Engineering AITen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Ireland