Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-7nlkj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-26T20:37:58.687Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

THE IMMERSION CYCLE: UNDERSTANDING IMMERSIVE EXPERIENCES THROUGH A CYCLICAL MODEL

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 July 2021

Cesar Lucho Lingan ,
Meng Li  and
Arnold P.O.S. Vermeeren
Cesar Lucho Lingan*
Affiliation:
Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú Delft University of Technology
Meng Li
Affiliation:
Delft University of Technology Xi’an Jiaotong University
Arnold P.O.S. Vermeeren
Affiliation:
Delft University of Technology
*
Lucho Lingan, Cesar Ruben, Pontificia Universidad Catolica del Peru, Art and Design, Peru, cesar.lucho@pucp.edu.pe

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The present work introduces a cyclical model which showcases the process of immersion during Immersive Technological Experiences (ITEs) such as Virtual Reality, Augmented Reality and Mixed Reality. This model is based on the identified concepts around immersion and immersive environments across 30 years. The concepts' similarities were used to organize them on a cyclical model by acknowledging the user's presence at the beginning and end of immersive experiences. The proposed model's value relies on its cyclical approach based on a user-centred perspective and having a general overview of the immersion process. The Immersive cycle can serve as a mapping tool for developers and researchers, thanks to the inclusion of guidelines that complements the model. Both of these were used in three different examples of ITEs. Furthermore, the cyclical model could be used as a tool for ideation and conceptualization during the early stages of developing immersive experiences. Nevertheless, it is recognized that this is the first step in developing this model; therefore, it still needs to be validated and improved based on tests with developers, designers and researchers in the field.

Keywords

User centred designDesign methodsVirtual reality
Type
Article
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 1: ICED21 , August 2021 , pp. 3011 - 3020
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

References

Ahmed, S., Zhang, J., & Demirel, O. (2018). Assessment of Types of Prototyping in Human-Centered Product Design. In International Conference on Digital Human Modeling and Applications in Health, Safety, Ergonomics and Risk Management (pp. 3–18). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91397-1_1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Althoff, T., White, R. W., & Horvitz, E. (2016). Influence of Pokémon Go on physical activity: study and implications. Journal of medical Internet research, 18(12), e315. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.6759CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azuma, R. T. (1997). A survey of augmented reality. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355–385. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.4.355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowman, D. A., & McMahan, R. P. (2007). Virtual reality: how much immersion is enough? Computer, 40(7), 36–43. https://doi,org/10.1109/MC.2007.257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, K. (2003). There is nothing virtual about immersion: Narrative immersion for VR and other interfaces. alumni.media.mit.edu/~brooks/storybiz/immersiveNotVirtual.pdf.Google Scholar
Buchanan, R., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1991). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. Design Issues, 8(1), 80.10.2307/1511458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, Neil R., 1942- (2010). Psychology: the science of behavior (7th ed). Allyn & Bacon, Boston.Google Scholar
Catalano, G. (2011). Virtual Reality in Interactive Environments: A Comparative Analysis of Spatial Audio Engines. SAE Institute Oxford.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Beyond boredom and anxiety. Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Cummings, J. J., & Bailenson, J. N. (2016). How immersive is enough? A meta-analysis of the effect of immersive technology on user presence. Media Psychology, 19(2), 272–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dangxiao, W. A. N. G., Yuan, G. U. O., Shiyi, L. I. U., Y, ZHANG., Weiliang, X. U., & Jing, X. I. A. O. (2019). Haptic display for virtual reality: progress and challenges. Virtual Reality & Intelligent Hardware, 1(2), 136–162. https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.2096-5796.2019.0008Google Scholar
Ermi, L., & Mäyrä, F. (2005). Fundamental components of the gameplay experience: Analysing immersion. Worlds in play: International perspectives on digital games research, 37(2), 37–53.Google Scholar
Haeling, J., Winkler, C., Leenders, S., Keßelheim, D., Hildebrand, A., & Necker, M. (2018, March). In-Car 6-DoF Mixed Reality for Rear-Seat and Co-Driver Entertainment. In 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (pp. 757–758). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2018.8446461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halabi, O., & Halwani, Y. (2018). Design and implementation of haptic virtual fixtures for preoperative surgical planning. Displays, 54, 9–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.displa.2018.07.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huber, T., Paschold, M., Hansen, C., Lang, H., & Kneist, W. (2018). Artificial Versus Video-Based Immersive Virtual Surroundings: Analysis of Performance and User's Preference. Surgical Innovation, 25(3), 280–285. https://doi.org/10.1177/1553350618761756CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, K., Billinghurst, M., Bruder, G., Duh, H. B. L., & Welch, G. F. (2018). Revisiting trends in augmented reality research: a review of the 2nd decade of ISMAR (2008–2017). IEEE transactions on visualization and computer graphics, 24(11), 2947–2962. https://doi.org/10.1109/TVCG.2018.2868591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, M., Ganni, S., Ponten, J., Albayrak, A., Rutkowski, A. F., & Jakimowicz, J. (2020, March). Analysing usability and presence of a virtual reality operating room (VOR) simulator during laparoscopic surgery training. In 2020 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (pp. 566–572). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR46266.2020.00078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGloin, R., Farrar, K., & Krcmar, M. (2013). Video games, immersion, and cognitive aggression: Does the controller matter? Media Psychology, 16, 65–87. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2012.752428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., & Kishino, F. (1995). Augmented reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. In Telemanipulator and telepresence technologies (Vol. 2351, pp. 282–292). International Society for Optics and Photonics. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.197321CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nacke, L., & Lindley, C. A. (2008). Flow and immersion in first-person shooters. Proceedings of the 2008 Conference on Future Play Research, Play, Share - Future Play 08. https://doi.org/10.1145/1496984.1496998CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O'Brien, H. L., & Toms, E. G. (2008). What is user engagement? A conceptual framework for defining user engagement with technology. Journal of the American society for Information Science and Technology, 59(6), 938–955. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20801CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paavilainen, J., Korhonen, H., Alha, K., Stenros, J., Koskinen, E., & Mayra, F. (2017). The Pokémon GO experience: A location-based augmented reality mobile game goes mainstream. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2493–2498). ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pan, Z., Cheok, A. D., Yang, H., Zhu, J., & Shi, J. (2006). Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments. Computers & graphics, 30(1), 20–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cag.2005.10.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pine, B. J., Pine, J., & Gilmore, J. H. (1999). The experience economy: work is theatre & every business a stage. Harvard Business Press.Google Scholar
Psotka, J. (1995). Immersive training systems: Virtual reality and education and training. Instructional Science, 23(5-6), 405–431. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00896880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shin, D. (2017). Empathy and embodied experience in virtual environment: To what extent can virtual reality stimulate empathy and embodied experience? Computers in Human Behavior, 78, 64–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.09.012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slater, M. (2003). A note on presence terminology. Presence connect, 3(3), 1–5.Google Scholar
Slater, M., & Wilbur, S. (1997). A framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 6(6), 603–616. https://doi.org/10.1162/pres.1997.6.6.603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duy, Tran, H. (2017). Designing a Virtual Reality Psychological Game.Google Scholar
Ternier, S., Klemke, R., Kalz, M., Van Ulzen, P., & Specht, M. (2012). ARLearn: Augmented Reality Meets Augmented Virtuality. J. UCS, 18(15), 2143–2164. https://doi.org/10.3217/jucs-018-15-2143Google Scholar
Witmer, B. G., & Singer, M. J. (1998). Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence, 7(3), 225–240. https://doi.org/10.1162/105474698565686CrossRefGoogle Scholar