Advertisement

Haptic Feedback Increases Perceived Social Presence

  • Eva-Lotta Sallnäs
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6192)

Abstract

Passing an object between two people is a common event that happens in various forms for example when giving someone a cup of coffee. An experimental study is presented where passing objects between two people in a virtual environment with haptic feedback was compared to passing objects in a nonhaptic virtual environment. The aim of the experiment was to investigate if and how added haptic feedback in such an environment affects perceived virtual presence, perceived social presence and perceived task performance. A within subject design was used, were nine pairs of subjects performed a hand off task with six differently sized cubes without audio communication. Results showed that haptic force feedback significantly improved perceived virtual presence, perceived social presence and perceived performance in this experiment.

Keywords

Haptic Presence Social presence Collaborative 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Appelle, S.: Haptic perception of form: Activity and stimulus attributes. In: Heller, M., Schiff, W. (eds.) The Psychology of Touch, pp. 169–188. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., New Jersey (1991)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bailenson, J.N., Yee, N.: Virtual interpersonal touch: Haptic interaction and copresence in collaborative virtual environments. International Journal of Multimedia Tools and Applications 37(1), 5–14 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Basdogan, C., Ho, C., Srinivasan, M.A., Slater, M.: An experimental study on the role of touch in shared virtual environments. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7(4), 443–460 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biggs, J., Srinivasan, M.A.: Haptic Interfaces. In: Stanney, K.M. (ed.) Handbook of Virtual Environment Technology. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Mahwah (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brave, S., Ishii, H., Dahley, A.: Tangible interfaces for remote collaboration and communication. In: Proceedings of CSCW 1998, Seattle, pp. 169–178 (1997)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Burke, J., Prewett, M.S., Gray, A.A., Yang, L., Stilson, F.R.B., Coovert, M.D., Elliot, L.R., Redden, E.: Comparing the Effects of Visual-Auditory and Visual-Tactile Feedback on User Performance: A Meta-analysis. In: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces, Banff, Alberta, Canada, November 2-4, pp. 108–117 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Crossan, A., Brewster, S.: Multimodal Trajectory Playback for Teaching Shape Information and Trajectories to Visually Impaired Computer Users. ACM Transactions on Accessible Computing, article 12, 1(2) (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Daft, R.L., Lengel, R.: Organizational information requirements, media richness, and structural design. Management Science 32, 554–571 (1986)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ditlea, S.: Another world: Inside artificial reality. PC Computing 2(11), 95–102 (1989)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Durlach, N., Slater, M.: Presence in shared virtual environments and virtual togetherness. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments 9(2), 214–217 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fitts, P.M.: The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. Journal of Experimental Psychology 47(6), 381–391 (1954)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fogg, B.J., Cutler, L., Arnold, P., Eisback, C.: HandJive: a device for interpersonal haptic entertainment. In: Proceedings of CHI 1998, Los Angeles, pp. 57–64 (1998)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heeter, C.: Being there: The subjective experience of presence. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual Environments 1(2), 262–271 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee, S., Kim, G.J.: Effects of haptic feedback, stereoscopy, and image resolution on performance and presence in remote navigation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 66(10), 701–717 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    McGookin, D., Brewster, S.: An initial investigation into non-visual computer supported collaboration. In: Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, California, April 28-May 3, pp. 2573–2578 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moll, J., Sallnäs, E.-L.: Communicative Functions of Haptic Feedback. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Haptic and Audio Interaction Design (HAID 2009), Dresden, Germany, September 10-11, pp. 1–10 (2009)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mottet, D., Guiard, Y., Ferrand, T., Bootsma, R.J.: Two-handed performance of a rhythmical Fitts task by individuals and dyads. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 27(6) (2001)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Nam, C.S., Shu, J., Chung, D.: The roles of sensory modalities in collaborative VEs (CVEs). Computers in Human Behavior 24, 1404–1417 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Oakley, I., Brewster, S., Gray, P.: Can you feel the force? An investigation of Haptic Collaboration in Shared Editors. In: Proceedings of Eurohaptics 2001, pp. 54–59 (2001)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rice, R.E.: Media appropriateness: Using social presence theory to compare traditional and new organizational media. Human Communication Research 19(4), 451–484 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sallnäs, E.-L., Rassmus-Gröhn, K., Sjöström, C.: Supporting presence in collaborative environments by haptic force feedback. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 7(4), 461–476 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sallnäs, E.-L.: Improved precision in mediated collaborative manipulation of objects by haptic force feedback. In: Brewster, S., Murray-Smith, R. (eds.) Haptic HCI 2000. LNCS, vol. 2058, pp. 69–75. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sallnäs, E.-L., Zhai, S.: Collaboration meets Fitts’ law: Passing virtual objects with and without haptic force feedback. In: Rauterberg, M., Menozzi, M., Wesson, J. (eds.) Proceedings of INTERACT 2003, pp. 97–104. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2003)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sallnäs, E.-L.: The effect of modality on social presence, presence and performance in collaborative VEs. Ph.D. thesis, TRITA-NA-0404. NADA, KTH, Sweden (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sallnäs, E.-L.: Effects of communication mode on social presence, presence and performance in collaborative virtual environments. Journal of Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments 14(4), 434–449 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sanchez-Vives, M.V., Slater, M.: From presence to consciousness through virtual reality. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 6, 332–339 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Short, J., Williams, E., Christie, B.: The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. Wiley, London (1976)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Slater, M., Wilbur, S.A.: framework for immersive virtual environments (FIVE): Speculations on the role of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments 6(6), 603–616 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Strong, R., Gaver, B.: Feather, Scent and Shaker: Supporting simple intimacy. In: Videos, Demonstrations and Short Papers of CSCW 1996, Boston, pp. 29–30 (1998)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Witmer, B.G., Singer, M.J.: Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments 7(3), 225–240 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eva-Lotta Sallnäs
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept of Human-Computer InteractionRoyal Institute of TechnologyStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations