The potential of remote XR experimentation: Defining benefits and limitations through expert survey and case study
dc.contributor.author | Ratcliffe, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Tokarchuk, L | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2023-10-06T11:13:10Z | |
dc.date.available | 2023-10-06T11:13:10Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2022 | |
dc.identifier.other | ARTN 952996 | |
dc.identifier.other | ARTN 952996 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://qmro.qmul.ac.uk/xmlui/handle/123456789/91213 | |
dc.description.abstract | Experimentation using extended reality (XR) technology is predominantly conducted in-lab with a co-present researcher. Remote XR experiments, without co-present researchers, have been less common, despite the success of remote approaches for non-XR investigations. In order to understand why remote XR experiments are atypical, this article outlines the perceived limitations, as well as potential benefits, of conducting remote XR experiments, through a thematic analysis of responses to a 30-item survey of 46 XR researchers. These are synthesized into five core research questions for the XR community, and concern types of participant, recruitment processes, potential impacts of remote setup and settings, the data-capture affordances of XR hardware and how remote XR experiment development can be optimized to reduce demands on the researcher. It then explores these questions by running two experiments in a fully “encapsulated” remote XR case study, in which the recruitment and experiment processes is distributed and conducted unsupervised. It discusses the design, experiment, and results from this case study in the context of these core questions. | en_US |
dc.publisher | Frontiers | en_US |
dc.relation.ispartof | FRONTIERS IN COMPUTER SCIENCE | |
dc.rights | This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. | |
dc.rights | Attribution 3.0 United States | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/ | * |
dc.subject | extended reality | en_US |
dc.subject | virtual reality | en_US |
dc.subject | augmented reality | en_US |
dc.subject | remote experiments | en_US |
dc.subject | encapsulated studies | en_US |
dc.subject | literature review | en_US |
dc.subject | expert interviews | en_US |
dc.subject | case study | en_US |
dc.title | The potential of remote XR experimentation: Defining benefits and limitations through expert survey and case study | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.rights.holder | © 2022 Ratcliffe and Tokarchuk. | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.3389/fcomp.2022.952996 | |
pubs.author-url | https://www.webofscience.com/api/gateway?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000898026600001&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=612ae0d773dcbdba3046f6df545e9f6a | en_US |
pubs.notes | Not known | en_US |
pubs.publication-status | Published | en_US |
pubs.volume | 4 | en_US |
rioxxterms.funder | Default funder | en_US |
rioxxterms.identifier.project | Default project | en_US |
qmul.funder | EPSRC and AHRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Media and Arts Technology::Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council | en_US |
Files in this item
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.