skip to main content
10.1145/3025453.3026046acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Honorable Mention

I Am The Passenger: How Visual Motion Cues Can Influence Sickness For In-Car VR

Published:02 May 2017Publication History

ABSTRACT

This paper explores the use of VR Head Mounted Displays (HMDs) in-car and in-motion for the first time. Immersive HMDs are becoming everyday consumer items and, as they offer new possibilities for entertainment and productivity, people will want to use them during travel in, for example, autonomous cars. However, their use is confounded by motion sickness caused in-part by the restricted visual perception of motion conflicting with physically perceived vehicle motion (accelerations/rotations detected by the vestibular system). Whilst VR HMDs restrict visual perception of motion, they could also render it virtually, potentially alleviating sensory conflict. To study this problem, we conducted the first on-road and in motion study to systematically investigate the effects of various visual presentations of the real-world motion of a car on the sickness and immersion of VR HMD wearing passengers. We established new baselines for VR in-car motion sickness, and found that there is no one best presentation with respect to balancing sickness and immersion. Instead, user preferences suggest different solutions are required for differently susceptible users to provide usable VR in-car. This work provides formative insights for VR designers and an entry point for further research into enabling use of VR HMDs, and the rich experiences they offer, when travelling.

Skip Supplemental Material Section

Supplemental Material

suppl.mov

Supplemental video

suppl.mov

Supplemental video

References

  1. Stuart Anstis. 1986. Motion perception in the frontal plane: Sensory aspects. Handbook of perception and human performance. 1 (1986), 16--1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Ben Lang. 2013. An Introduction to Positional Tracking and Degrees of Freedom (DOF). (2013). http://www.roadtovr.com/introduction-positional-track ing-degrees-freedom-dof/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Giovanni Bertolini and Dominik Straumann. 2016. Moving in a Moving World: A Review on Vestibular Motion Sickness. Frontiers in Neurology 7 (2016), 14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Alvah C. Bittner and John C. Guignard. 1985. Human factors engineering principles for minimizing adverse ship motion effects: Theory and practice. Naval Engineers Journal 97, 4 (1985), 205--213.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Willem Bles, Jelte E Bos, Bernd de Graaf, Eric Groen, and Alexander H Wertheim. 1998. Motion sickness: only one provocative conflict? Brain Research Bulletin 47, 5 (1998), 481--487.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Daniel Boland and Mark McGill. 2015. Lost in the rift. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students 22, 1 (nov 2015), 40--45. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. JE Bos. 2015a. Less sickness with more motion and/or mental distraction. Journal of Vestibular Research 25, 1 (2015), 23--33. http://content.iospress.com/articles/jo urnal-of-vestibular-research/ves00541Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Jelte E. Bos. 2011. Nuancing the relationship between motion sickness and postural stability. Displays 32, 4 (2011), 189--193.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Jelte E. Bos. 2015b. Less sickness with more motion and/or mental distraction. Journal of Vestibular Research 25, 1 (2015), 23--33.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Claudio Braccesi, Filippo Cianetti, and Renzo Scaletta. 2015. The use of the PCT index in railway motion sickness incidence evaluation. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part F: Journal of Rail and Rapid Transit 229, 4 (2015), 428--445.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Michael J. Cevette, Jan Stepanek, Daniela Cocco, Anna M. Galea, Gaurav N. Pradhan, Linsey S. Wagner, Sarah R. Oakley, Benn E. Smith, David A. Zapala, and Kenneth H. Brookler. 2012. Oculo-Vestibular Recoupling Using Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation to Mitigate Simulator Sickness. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 83, 6 (2012), 549--555.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Jean-Rémy Chardonnet, Mohammad Ali Mirzaei, and Frédéric Mérienne. 2015. Visually Induced Motion Sickness Estimation and Prediction in Virtual Reality using Frequency Components Analysis of Postural Sway Signal. In ICAT-EGVE 2015 International Conference on Artificial Reality and Telexistence and Eurographics Symposium on Virtual Environments, Masataka Imura, Pablo Figueroa, and Betty Mohler (Eds.). The Eurographics Association. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Bernard Cohen, Mingjia Dai, Dmitri Ogorodnikov, Jean Laurens, Theodore Raphan, Philippe MÃijller, Alexiou Athanasios, JÃijrgen Edmaier, Thomas Grossenbacher, Klaus StadtmÃijller, Ueli Brugger, Gerald Hauser, and Dominik Straumann. 2011. Motion sickness on tilting trains. The FASEB Journal 25, 11 (2011), 3765--3774.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Stanley Coren, Lawrence M. Ward, and James T. Enns. 1999. Sensation and Perception. John Wiley & Sons.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. M.A. Cuddihy and M.K. Rao. 2013. Autonomous vehicle entertainment system US9272708 B2. (2013). https://www.google.com/patents/US9272708 US Patent 9,272,708.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Joakim Dahlman. 2009. Psychophysiological and Performance Aspects on Motion Sickness. Ph.D. Dissertation. Linköping University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Rehabilitation Medicine.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Department for Transport. 2016. National Travel Survey. (2016). https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/natio nal-travel-survey-2015Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Cyriel Diels. 2014. Will autonomous vehicles make us sick. In Contemporary Ergonomics and Human Factors. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 301--307.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Cyriel Diels and Jelte E. Bos. 2015. User Interface Considerations to Prevent Self-driving Carsickness. In Adjunct Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 14--19. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Cyriel Diels and Jelte E. Bos. 2016. Self-driving carsickness. Applied Ergonomics 53, Part B (2016), 374 -- 382. Transport in the 21st Century: The Application of Human Factors to Future User NeedsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. M. Elbanhawi, M. Simic, and R. Jazar. 2015. In the Passenger Seat: Investigating Ride Comfort Measures in Autonomous Cars. IEEE Intelligent Transportation Systems Magazine 7, 3 (Fall 2015), 4--17.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. A. S. Fernandes and S. K. Feiner. 2016. Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification. In 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI). 201--210.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Andy Field, Jeremy Miles, and Zoë Field. 2012. Discovering Statistics Using R. SAGE Publications. 992 pages. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/discovering-s tatistics-using-r/book236067Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Benjamin Gardner and Charles Abraham. 2007. What drives car use? A grounded theory analysis of commuters' reasons for driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour 10, 3 (2007), 187 -- 200.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  25. John F. Golding. 2006. Predicting individual differences in motion sickness susceptibility by questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences 41, 2 (2006), 237--248.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. John F Golding and Michael A Gresty. 2013. Motion sickness and disorientation in vehicles. Oxford textbook of vertigo and imbalance. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2013), 293--306.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. John F Golding and Michael A Gresty. 2015. Pathophysiology and treatment of motion sickness. Current opinion in neurology 28, 1 (feb 2015), 83--8.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. John F Golding, Priscilla Kadzere, and Michael A Gresty. 2005. Motion sickness susceptibility fluctuates through the menstrual cycle. Aviation, space, and environmental medicine 76, 10 (oct 2005), 970--3. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16235881Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Michael J Griffin and Maria M Newman. 2004. Visual field effects on motion sickness in cars. Aviation, space, and environmental medicine 75, 9 (sep 2004), 739--48. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15460624Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. F E Guedry and A J Benson. 1978. Coriolis cross-coupling effects: disorienting and nauseogenic or not? Aviation, space, and environmental medicine 49, 1 Pt 1 (jan 1978), 29--35. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/304719Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Isadora Ferreira Henriques, Dhelfeson Willya Douglas De Oliveira, Fernanda Oliveira-Ferreira, and Peterson MO Andrade. 2014. Motion sickness prevalence in school children. European journal of pediatrics 173, 11 (nov 2014), 1473--82.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. M Hosseini and S Farahani. 2015. Vestibular findings in motion sickness. Auditory and ... (2015). http://avr.tums.ac.ir/index.php/avr/article/view/10Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Ohad Inbar and Noam Tractinsky. 2011. Make a Trip an Experience: Sharing In-car Information with Passengers. In CHI '11 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI EA '11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1243--1248. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Jason Jerald. 2015. Perception of Space and Time. In The VR Book: Human-Centered Design for Virtual Reality. Association for Computing Machinery, Chapter 9.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. Judith A. Joseph and Michael J. Griffin. 2007. Motion Sickness from Combined Lateral and Roll Oscillation: Effect of Varying Phase Relationships. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine 78, 10 (2007), 944--950.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  36. Robert S. Kennedy, Norman E. Lane, Kevin S. Berbaum, and Michael G. Lilienthal. 1993a. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (jul 1993), 203--220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Robert S. Kennedy, Norman E. Lane, Kevin S. Berbaum, and Michael G. Lilienthal. 1993b. Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An Enhanced Method for Quantifying Simulator Sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (jul 1993), 203--220.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. B Keshavarz, H Hecht, and L Zschutschke. 2011. Intra-visual conflict in visually induced motion sickness. Displays (2011). http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0141938211000539Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Behrang Keshavarz, Bernhard E Riecke, Lawrence J Hettinger, and Jennifer L Campos. 2015. Vection and visually induced motion sickness: how are they related? Frontiers in psychology 6 (jan 2015), 472.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. James R. Lackner. 2014. Motion sickness: more than nausea and vomiting. Experimental Brain Research 232, 8 (2014), 2493--2510.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  41. Steve Lamb and Kenny C. S. Kwok. 2014. MSSQ-Short Norms May Underestimate Highly Susceptible Individuals: Updating the MSSQ-Short Norms. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Robert L Matchock, Max E Levine, Peter J Gianaros, and Robert M Stern. 2008. Susceptibility to nausea and motion sickness as a function of the menstrual cycle. Women's health issues : official publication of the Jacobs Institute of Women's Health 18, 4 (2008), 328--35.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Matt Kamen. 2016. Ford patents windshield movie screen for driverless cars. (2016). http://www.wired.co.uk/arti cle/ford-patents-movie-window-for-driverless-carsGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Mark McGill, Daniel Boland, Roderick Murray-Smith, and Stephen Brewster. 2015. A Dose of Reality: Overcoming Usability Challenges in VR Head-Mounted Displays. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems CHI '15. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 2143--2152. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. Mark McGill, John H. Williamson, and Stephen Brewster. 2016. Examining The Role of Smart TVs and VR HMDs in Synchronous At-a-Distance Media Consumption. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 23, 5, Article 33 (Nov. 2016), 57 pages. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. K Meissner, P Enck, ER Muth, S Kellermann, and S Klosterhalfen. 2009. Cortisol levels predict motion sickness tolerance in women but not in men. Physiology & behavior 97, 1 (apr 2009), 102--6.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  47. Mark Mine, Arun Yoganandan, and Dane Coffey. 2014. Making VR Work: Building a Real-world Immersive Modeling Application in the Virtual World. In Proceedings of the 2Nd ACM Symposium on Spatial User Interaction (SUI '14). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 80--89. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. Montavit. 2016. Causes and treatment of motion sickness. (2016). http://www.montavit.com/en/areas-therapy/caus es-and-treatment-motion-sicknessGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  49. JB Murray. 1997. Psychophysiological aspects of motion sickness. Perceptual and motor skills (1997).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  50. Elon Musk. 2016. Master Plan, Part Deux. (2016). https://www.tesla.com/blog/master-plan-part-deuxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  51. NBC Sports. 2016. Rio Olympics: 360 Tour of RIO. (2016). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yv6zRv-qKmkGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. NHS Choices. 2014. Motion sickness symptoms. (2014). http://www.nhs.uk/conditions/motion-sickness/pages/in troduction.aspxGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. Charles M Oman. 1990. Motion sickness: a synthesis and evaluation of the sensory conflict theory. Canadian journal of physiology and pharmacology 68, 2 (1990), 294--303.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  54. Natalie Owen, Antony Graham Leadbetter, and Lucy Yardley. 1998. Relationship between postural control and motion sickness in healthy subjects. Brain Research Bulletin 47, 5 (1998), 471--474.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  55. A. J. Parmet and W. R. Ercoline. 2008. Spatial Orientation in Flight. In Fundamentals of Aerospace Medicine (fourth ed.), Jeffrey R. Davis, Johnson Robert, and Jan Stepanek (Eds.). Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Chapter 6. http://www.lww.com/Product/9780781774666Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  56. Paul James. 2016. Samsung's New Headphones Trick Your Inner Ear to Move You in VR. (2016). http://www.roadtovr.com/samsungs-new-headphones-trick -your-inner-ear-to-move-you-in-vr/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  57. Philippe Perrin, Alexis Lion, Gilles Bosser, Gérome Gauchard, and Claude Meistelman. 2013. Motion sickness in rally car co-drivers. Aviation, space, and environmental medicine 84, 5 (may 2013), 473--7. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23713212Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  58. Press Association. 2015. Millions of people spend two or more hours commuting a day. (2015). https://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/nov/09/millionpeople-two-hours-commuting-tuc-studyGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. James T Reason and Joseph John Brand. 1975. Motion sickness. Academic press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  60. Gary E. Riccio and Thomas A. Stoffregen. 1991. An Ecological Theory of Motion Sickness and Postural Instability. Ecological Psychology 3, 3 (1991), 195--240.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  61. Julie Rico and Stephen Brewster. 2010. Usable Gestures for Mobile Interfaces: Evaluating Social Acceptability. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '10). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 887--896. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  62. Roadshow. 2016. See where Tesla makes its cars in 360 degrees. (2016). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmHvvZjV87UGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  63. A Rolnick and R E Lubow. 1991. Why is the driver rarely motion sick? The role of controllability in motion sickness. Ergonomics 34, 7 (jul 1991), 867--79.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  64. Qantas News Room. 2015. Qantas & Samung unveil industry-first virtual reality experience for travellers. (2015). http://www.qantasnewsroom.com.au/media-releas es/qantas-samsung-unveil-industry-first-virtual-real ity-experience-for-travellers/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  65. Davide Salanitri, Chrisminder Hare, Simone Borsci, Glyn Lawson, Sarah Sharples, and Brian Water Fi Eld. 2015. Relationship between trust and usability in virtual environments: An ongoing study, Vol. 9169. Springer Verlag, 49--59.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  66. J Saldaña. 2015. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/the-cod ing-manual-for-qualitative-researchers/book243616Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  67. Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak. 2014. Public opinion about self-driving vehicles in China, India, Japan, the U.S., the U.K., and Australia. (oct 2014). http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/109433Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  68. Thomas Schubert, Frank Friedmann, and Holger Regenbrecht. 2001. The experience of presence: Factor analytic insights. Presence: Teleoperators and virtual environments 10, 3 (2001), 266--281. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  69. K Sharma and Aparna. 1997. Prevalence and correlates of susceptibility to motion sickness. Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae 46, 2 (jan 1997), 105--21. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9492893Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  70. Avi Shupak and Carlos R Gordon. 2006. Motion sickness: advances in pathogenesis, prediction, prevention, and treatment. Aviation, space, and environmental medicine 77, 12 (2006), 1213--1223.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  71. M Sivak and B Schoettle. 2015. Motion sickness in self-driving vehicles. (2015). http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/111747Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  72. OBD Solutions. 2016. OBDLink® LX Bluetooth | OBDLink® | OBD Solutions. (2016). http://www.obdlink.com/lxbt/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  73. F. Soyka, E. Kokkinara, M. Leyrer, H. Buelthoff, M. Slater, and B. Mohler. 2015. Turbulent motions cannot shake VR. In 2015 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR). 33--40.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  74. D Tal, G Wiener, and A Shupak. 2014. Mal de debarquement, motion sickness and the effect of an artificial horizon. Journal of Vestibular Research (2014). http://content.iospress.com/articles/journal-of-vesti bular-research/ves00505Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  75. M Turner and M J Griffin. 1999. Motion sickness in public road transport: the effect of driver, route and vehicle. Ergonomics 42, 12 (dec 1999), 1646--64.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  76. U.S. Department of Transportation. 2009. Summary of travel trends. National Household Travel Survey (2009).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  77. VR Coaster. 2016. Synchronized VR Rollercoasters. (2016). http://www.vrcoaster.com/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  78. Takahiro Wada and Keigo Yoshida. 2016. Effect of passengers' active head tilt and opening/closure of eyes on motion sickness in lateral acceleration environment of cars. Ergonomics 59, 8 (2016), 1050--1059. PMID: 26481809Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  79. Wall Street Journal. 2016. How Thousands of Pigeons Became Art (360 Video). (2016). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9wWuKbnvycGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  80. Laura Watts and John Urry. 2008. Moving methods, travelling times. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 26, 5 (2008), 860--874.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  81. David Wilfinger, Alexander Meschtscherjakov, Martin Murer, Sebastian Osswald, and Manfred Tscheligi. 2011. Are We There Yet? A Probing Study to Inform Design for the Rear Seat of Family Cars. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 657--674.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  82. Will Mason. 2015. Wearality shows off a new 180-degree FOV lens for VR. (2015). http://uploadvr.com/wearality-180-degree-fov-lens-vr/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  83. Robert Xiao and Hrvoje Benko. 2016. Augmenting the Field-of-View of Head-Mounted Displays with Sparse Peripheral Displays. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1221--1232. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  84. Fleur D Yen Pik Sang, Jessica P Billar, John F Golding, and Michael A Gresty. 2003. Behavioral methods of alleviating motion sickness: effectiveness of controlled breathing and a music audiotape. Journal of travel medicine 10, 2 (2003), 108--11. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12650654Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  85. Li-Li Zhang, Jun-Qin Wang, Rui-Rui Qi, Lei-Lei Pan, Min Li, and Yi-Ling Cai. 2016. Motion Sickness: Current Knowledge and Recent Advance. CNS neuroscience & therapeutics 22, 1 (jan 2016), 15--24.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. I Am The Passenger: How Visual Motion Cues Can Influence Sickness For In-Car VR

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      CHI '17: Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 2017
      7138 pages
      ISBN:9781450346559
      DOI:10.1145/3025453

      Copyright © 2017 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 2 May 2017

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI '17 Paper Acceptance Rate600of2,400submissions,25%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

      Upcoming Conference

      CHI '24
      CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      May 11 - 16, 2024
      Honolulu , HI , USA

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader