Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 78, Issue 14, pp 19473–19493 | Cite as

Collaborative immersive authoring tool for real-time creation of multisensory VR experiences

  • Hugo CoelhoEmail author
  • Miguel Melo
  • José Martins
  • Maximino Bessa


With the appearance of innovative virtual reality (VR) technologies, the need to create immersive content arose. Although there are already some non-immersive solutions to address immersive audio-visual content, there are no solutions that allow the creation of immersive multisensory content. This work proposes a novel architecture for a collaborative immersive tool that allows the creation of multisensory VR experiences in real-time, thus promoting the expeditious development, adoption, and use of immersive systems and enabling the building of custom-solutions that can be used in an intuitive manner to support organizations’ business initiatives. To validate the presented proposal, two approaches for the authoring tools (Desktop interface and Immersive interface) were subjected to a set of tests and evaluations consisting of a usability study that demonstrated not only the participants’ acceptance of the authoring tool but also the importance of using immersive interfaces for the creation of such VR experiences.


Collaborative Multisensory Virtual reality Real-time Authoring tool 



  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Ahlberg G, Heikkinen T, Iselius L, Leijonmarck C-E, Rutqvist J, Arvidsson D (2002) Does training in a virtual reality simulator improve surgical performance? Surg Endosc 16(1):126–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Akçayır M, Akçayır G (2017) Advantages and challenges associated with augmented reality for education: a systematic review of the literature. Educ Res Rev 20:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arnold P (2017) You better eat to survive! Exploring edible interactions in a virtual reality game. In: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA, p 206–209Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marôco J (2018). Análise Estatística com o SPSS Statistics.: 7 edition. ReportNumber, LdaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    BlueLabel Labs (2017) How much does it cost to create a virtual reality app?, Idea to Appster. [Online]. Available: Accessed 30 Jan 2018
  7. 7.
    Bouvier P (2008) The five pillars of presence: guidelines to reach presence. Spagn. GAMBERINI Éditeurs Proc. Presence, p 246–249Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooke J (1996). SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usability evaluation in industry, 189(194):4–7Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burdea GC, Coiffet P (2003) Virtual reality technology. Wiley, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Coelho H, Melo M, Barbosa L, Martins J, Sérgio M, Bessa M (2018) Immersive Edition of multisensory 360 videos. Presented at the WorldCist’18 - 6th World Conference on Information Systems and Technologies. In: Proceedings of 6th World Conference on Information Systems and Technologies - WorldCist’18, Nápoles, p 309–318Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    CryTec (2017) CryEngine. [Online]. Available: Accessed 08 Nov 2017
  12. 12.
    de Barros PG, Lindeman RW (2013) Performance effects of multi-sensory displays in virtual teleoperation environments. In: Proceedings of the 1st Symposium on Spatial User Interaction, New York, NY, USA, p 41–48Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Dinh HQ, Walker N, Hodges LF, Song C, Kobayashi A (1999) Evaluating the importance of multi-sensory input on memory and the sense of presence in virtual environments. In: Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality (Cat. No. 99CB36316), p 222–228Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Engström E, Runeson P (2011) Software product line testing – a systematic mapping study. Inf Softw Technol 53(1):2–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Epic Games (2017) Unreal Engine 4. [Online]. Available: Accessed 08 Nov 2017
  16. 16.
    Feng M, Dey A, Lindeman RW (2016) An initial exploration of a multi-sensory design space: Tactile support for walking in immersive virtual environments. In: 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), p 95–104Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Freitas J, Meira C, Melo M, Barbosa L, Bessa M (2015) Information system for the management and visualization of multisensorial contents. In: 2015 10th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), Aveiro, Portugal, p 1–7Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fröhlich J, Wachsmuth I (2013) The visual, the auditory and the haptic – a user study on combining modalities in virtual worlds. In: Virtual augmented and mixed reality. Designing and developing augmented and virtual environments, p 159–168Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Haque S, Srinivasan S (2006) A meta-analysis of the training effectiveness of virtual reality surgical simulators. IEEE Trans Inf Technol Biomed 10(1):51–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Heilig ML “Sensorama simulator,” US3050870 A, 28 Aug 1962Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Howard MC (2017) A meta-analysis and systematic literature review of virtual reality rehabilitation programs. Comput Hum Behav 70:317–327MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huang H-M, Rauch U, Liaw S-S (2010) Investigating learners’ attitudes toward virtual reality learning environments: based on a constructivist approach. Comput Educ 55(3):1171–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Huang Y, Weng Y, Zhou M (2014) Modular design of urban traffic-light control systems based on synchronized timed petri nets. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst 15(2):530–539CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    IJsselsteijn WA, de Ridder H, Freeman J, Avons SE (2000) Presence: concept, determinants, and measurement. In: Human Vision and Electronic Imaging V, vol. 3959, p 520–530Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Iwata N et al (2011) Construct validity of the LapVR virtual-reality surgical simulator. Surg Endosc 25(2):423–428CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Jones S, Dawkins S (2018) The sensorama revisited: evaluating the application of multi-sensory input on the sense of presence in 360-degree immersive film in virtual reality. In: Augmented reality and virtual reality. Springer, Cham, p 183–197Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lewis JR (1995) IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. Int J Hum Comput Interact 7(1):57–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Luigi M, Massimiliano M, Aniello P, Gennaro R, Virginia PR (2015) On the validity of immersive virtual reality as tool for multisensory evaluation of urban spaces. Energy Procedia 78:471–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Manghisi VM et al (2017) Experiencing the sights, smells, sounds, and climate of southern Italy in VR. IEEE Comput Graph Appl 37(6):19–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marchand A, Hennig-Thurau T (2013) Value creation in the video game industry: industry economics, consumer benefits, and research opportunities. J Interact Mark 27(3):141–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    McCauley ME, Sharkey TJ (1992) Cybersickness: perception of self-motion in virtual environments. Presence Teleop Virt 1(3):311–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McGregor C, Bonnis B, Stanfield B, Stanfield M (2017) Integrating big data analytics, virtual reality, and ARAIG to support resilience assessment and development in tactical training. In: 2017 IEEE 5th International Conference on Serious Games and Applications for Health (SeGAH), p 1–7Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Mortara M, Catalano CE, Bellotti F, Fiucci G, Houry-Panchetti M, Petridis P (2014) Learning cultural heritage by serious games. J Cult Herit 15(3):318–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Mujber TS, Szecsi T, Hashmi MSJ (2004) Virtual reality applications in manufacturing process simulation. J Mater Process Technol 155–156:1834–1838CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Newbutt N, Sung C, Kuo HJ, Leahy MJ (2017) The acceptance, challenges, and future applications of wearable technology and virtual reality to support people with autism spectrum disorders. In: Recent advances in technologies for inclusive well-being. Springer, Cham, p 221–241Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pan MKXJ, Niemeyer G (2017) Catching a real ball in virtual reality. In: 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR), Los Angeles, CA, USA, p 269–270Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Pan Z, Cheok AD, Yang H, Zhu J, Shi J (2006) Virtual reality and mixed reality for virtual learning environments. Comput Graph 30(1):20–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Passig D, Tzuriel D, Eshel-Kedmi G (2016) Improving children’s cognitive modifiability by dynamic assessment in 3D immersive virtual reality environments. Comput Educ 95:296–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Portman ME, Natapov A, Fisher-Gewirtzman D (2015) To go where no man has gone before: virtual reality in architecture, landscape architecture and environmental planning. Comput Environ Urban Syst 54:376–384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Qu T, Lei S, Wang Z, Nie D, Chen X, Huang GQ (2016) IoT-based real-time production logistics synchronization system under smart cloud manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 84(1–4):147–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Sacau A, Laarni J, Hartmann T (2008) Influence of individual factors on presence. Comput Hum Behav 24(5):2255–2273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schneider O, MacLean K, Swindells C, Booth K (2017) Haptic experience design: what hapticians do and where they need help. Int J Hum Comput Stud 107:5–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Seymour NE et al (2002) Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg 236(4):458–463; discussion 463-464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Slater M, Wilbur S (1997) A framework for immersive virtual environments five: speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence Teleop Virt 6(6):603–616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Slater M, Usoh M, Steed A (1994) Depth of presence in virtual environments. Presence Teleop Virt 3(2):130–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Unity Technologies (2017) “Unity 2017.3.,” Unity Technologies. [Online]. Available: Accessed 08 Sep 2017
  47. 47.
    Wang J, Leach O, Lindeman RW (2013) DIY World Builder: an immersive level-editing system. In: 2013 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), p 195–196Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang R, Yao J, Wang L, Liu X, Wang H, Zheng L (2017) A surgical training system for four medical punctures based on virtual reality and haptic feedback. In: 2017 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), p 215–216Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Trás-os-Montes and Alto DouroVila RealPortugal
  2. 2.INESC TECPortoPortugal
  3. 3.Polytechnique Institute of Bragrança – EsACTMirandelaPortugal

Personalised recommendations