Advertisement

Formative Design and Evaluation of an Immersive Learning Intervention for Adults with Autism: Design and Research Implications

  • Matthew Schmidt
  • Dennis BeckEmail author
  • Noah Glaser
  • Carla Schmidt
  • Fahad Abdeen
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 1044)

Abstract

We present here the formative design and evaluation of Virtuoso, an immersive learning intervention for adults significantly impacted by autism. The intervention consisted of two components: a spherical, video-based VR intervention, and a headset-based VR intervention. VR-based interventions such as Virtuoso have garnered a modest basis of empirical support, but more is needed. The focus of the intervention was on using public transportation. Usage testing utilized multi-methods, including observational and survey methods. Results suggest a very positive user experience for participants using both video-based and headset-based VR, indicating the video-based condition was more relevant and easy to use. Implications for design and future directions for research related to VR-based interventions for individuals with autism are discussed.

References

  1. 1.
    Centers for Disease Control Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network. Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years. Atlanta, GA (2014). http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6302a1.htm?s_cid=ss6302a1_w
  2. 2.
    American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th edn.). Washington, DC (2013)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhang, L., Warren, Z., Swanson, A., Weitlauf, A., Sarkar, N.: Understanding performance and verbal-communication of children with ASD in a collaborative virtual environment. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 48, 1–11 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Barton, E.E., Pustejovsky, J.E., Maggin, D.M., Reichow, B.: Technology-aided instruction and intervention for students with ASD: a meta-analysis using novel methods of estimating effect sizes for single-case research. Remedial Spec. Educ. 38(6), 371–386 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boucenna, S., et al.: Interactive technologies for autistic children: a review. Cogn. Comput. 6(4), 722–740 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goodwin, M.S.: Enhancing and accelerating the pace of autism research and treatment: the promise of developing innovative technology. Focus Autism Other Dev. Disabil. 23(2), 125–128 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grynszpan, O., Weiss, P.L., Perez-Diaz, F., Gal, E.: Innovative technology-based interventions for autism spectrum disorders: a meta-analysis. Autism 18(4), 346–361 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Odom, S.L., et al.: Technology-aided interventions and instruction for adolescents with autism spectrum disorder. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 45(12), 3805–3819 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rutten, A., et al.: The AS interactive project: single-user and collaborative virtual environments for people with high-functioning autistic spectrum disorders. Comput. Anim. Virtual Worlds 14(5), 233–241 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Parsons, S.: Authenticity in virtual reality for assessment and intervention in autism: a conceptual review. Educ. Res. Rev. 19, 138–157 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.08.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Trepagnier, C.Y., Olsen, D.E., Boteler, L., Bell, C.A.: Virtual conversation partner for adults with autism. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 14(1–2), 21–27 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jarrold, W., et al.: Social attention in a virtual public speaking task in higher functioning children with autism. Autism Res. 6(5), 393–410 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lorenzo, G., Pomares, J., Lledó, A.: Inclusion of immersive virtual learning environments and visual control systems to support the learning of students with asperger syndrome. Comput. Educ. 62, 88–101 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Moore, D., Cheng, Y., McGrath, P., Powell, N.J.: Collaborative virtual environment technology for people with autism. Focus Autism Other Dev. Disabil. 20(4), 231–243 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schmidt, M., Laffey, J.:. Visualizing behavioral data from a 3D virtual learning environment: a preliminary study. In: IEEE Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (HICSS), pp. 3387–3394 (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2012.639
  16. 16.
    Wang, X., Laffey, J., Xing, W., Ma, Y., Stichter, J.: Exploring embodied social presence of youth with autism in 3D collaborative virtual learning environment: a case study. Comput. Hum. Behav. 55, 310–321 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wallace, S., Parsons, S., Bailey, A.: Self-reported sense of presence and responses to social stimuli by adolescents with autism spectrum disorder in a collaborative virtual reality environment. J. Intellect. Dev. Disabil. 42(2), 131–141 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Glaser, N.J., Schmidt, M.: Usage considerations of 3D collaborative virtual learning environments to promote development and transfer of knowledge and skills for individuals with autism. Technol. Knowl. Learn. (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10758-018-9369-9
  19. 19.
    Hwang, G.-J., Jong, M.S.Y., Shang, J.: Call for papers. Interact. Learn. Environ. 26(4), 566 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brown, A., Green, T.: Virtual reality: low-cost tools and resources for the classroom. TechTrends 60(5), 517–519 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fowler, C.: Virtual reality and learning: where is the pedagogy? Br. J. Educ. Technol. 46(2), 412–422 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Allen, S.M., Moore, V.: The prevalence and consequences of unmet need: contrasts between older and younger adults with disability. Med. Care 35(11), 1132–1148 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carmien, S., Dawe, M., Fischer, G., Gorman, A., Kintsch, A., Sullivan Jr., J.F.: Socio-technical environments supporting people with cognitive disabilities using public transportation. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 12(2), 233–262 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brooke, J.: SUS-A quick and dirty usability scale. Usabil. Eval. Ind. 189(194), 4–7 (1996)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Khowaja, K., Salim, S.S.: Heuristics to evaluate interactive systems for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). PLoS One 10(7), e0132187 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Nielsen, J.: 10 usability heuristics for user interface design. Nielsen Norman Group, 1(1) (1995)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Benaquisto, L.: Open coding. In: Given, L.M. (ed.) The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods, p. 582. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks (2008).  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963909.n299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Simmons, N.: Axial coding. In: Allen, M. (ed.) The Sage Encyclopedia of Communication Research Methods, pp. 80–82. SAGE Publications Inc., Thousand Oaks (2017).  https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483381411.n33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hubbard, R.S., Power, B.M.: The Art of Classroom Inquiry: A Handbook for Teacher Researchers, Revised edn. Heinemann, Portsmouth (2003)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Steel, E.J., Janeslätt, G.: Drafting standards on cognitive accessibility: a global collaboration. Disabil. Rehabil. Assistive Technol. 12(4), 385–389 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Cobb, S.V., Nichols, S., Ramsey, A., Wilson, J.R.: Virtual reality-induced symptoms and effects (VRISE). Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 8(2), 169–186 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Stokes, T.F., Osnes, P.G.: An operant pursuit of generalization – republished article. Behav. Ther. 47, 720–732 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Connell, B.R., et al.: The principles of universal design. NCSU (1997). http://www.ncsu.edu/ncsu/design/cud/about_ud/udprinciplestext.htm. Accessed 22 Feb 2019
  34. 34.
    Wickens, C.: Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. Charles E. Merrill, Columbus (1984)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Noroozi, A., Khan, F., MacKinnon, S., Amyotte, P., Deacon, T.: Determination of human error probabilities in maintenance procedures of a pump. Process Saf. Environ. Prot. 92, 131–141 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Zhang, Y., Goonetilleke, R.S., Plocher, T., Liang, S.-F.M.: Time-related behaviour in multitasking situations. Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Stud. 62, 425–455 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Picard, R.W.: Affective Computing. MIT Press, Cambridge (1997)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Seip, J.A.: Teaching the Autistic and Developmentally Delayed: A Guide for Staff Training and Development. British Columbia, Delta (1996)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hill, E., Berthoz, S., Frith, U.: Brief report: cognitive processing of own emotions in individuals with autistic spectrum disorder and in their relatives. J. Autism Dev. Disord. 34(2), 229–234 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Welch, K.C., Lahiri, U., Liu, C., Weller, R., Sarkar, N., Warren, Z.: An affect-sensitive social interaction paradigm utilizing virtual reality environments for autism intervention. In: Jacko, J.A. (ed.) HCI 2009. LNCS, vol. 5612, pp. 703–712. Springer, Heidelberg (2009).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-02580-8_77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Stokes, T.F., Baer, D.M.: An implicit technology of generalization. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 10(2), 349–367 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stokes, T.F., Fowler, S.A., Baer, D.M.: Training preschool children to recruit natural communities of reinforcement. J. Appl. Behav. Anal. 11(2), 285–303 (1978)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Case-Smith, J., Weaver, L.L., Fristad, M.A.: A systematic review of sensory processing interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders. Autism 19(2), 133–148 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthew Schmidt
    • 1
  • Dennis Beck
    • 2
    Email author
  • Noah Glaser
    • 1
  • Carla Schmidt
    • 3
  • Fahad Abdeen
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Instructional Design and TechnologyUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.Department of Curriculum and InstructionUniversity of ArkansasFayettevilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Special EducationUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations