skip to main content
10.1145/3170427.3188629acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
abstract

WatchVR: Exploring the Usage of a Smartwatch for Interaction in Mobile Virtual Reality

Published:20 April 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Mobile virtual reality (VR) head-mounted displays (HMDs) are steadily becoming part of people's everyday life. Most current interaction approaches rely either on additional hardware (e.g. Daydream Controller) or offer only a liMassachusetts Institute of Technologyed interaction concept (e.g. Google Cardboard). We explore a solution where a conventional smartwatch, a device users already carry around with them, is used to enable short interactions but also allows for longer complex interactions with mobile VR. To explore the possibilities of a smartwatch for interaction, we conducted a user study in which we compared two variables with regard to user performance: interaction method (touchscreen vs inertial sensors) and wearing method (hand-held vs wrist-worn). We found that selection time and error rate were lowest when holding the smartwatch in one hand using its inertial sensors for interaction (hand-held).

References

  1. Daniel L Ashbrook. 2010. Enabling mobile microinteractions. Georgia Institute of Technology.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Wolff Dobson. 2015. Lightning Talk: Bite-Sized VR. (2015). Retrieved January 2, 2018 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MueSHMNyGtM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Statista (EMarketer). 2018. Number of mobile virtual reality (VR) users worldwide from 2015 to 2020 (in millions). (2018). Retrieved January 3, 2018 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/650834/ mobile-vr-users-worldwide/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Tovi Grossman and Ravin Balakrishnan. 2006. The design and evaluation of selection techniques for 3D volumetric displays. In Proc. UIST 2006. ACM, 3--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Jan Gugenheimer. 2016. Nomadic Virtual Reality: Exploring New Interaction Concepts for Mobile Virtual Reality Head-Mounted Displays. In Proc. UIST'16 (UIST '16 Adjunct). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 9--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jan Gugenheimer, David Dobbelstein, Christian Winkler, Gabriel Haas, and Enrico Rukzio. 2016. FaceTouch: Enabling Touch Interaction in Display Fixed UIs for Mobile Virtual Reality. In Proc. UIST'16. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 49--60. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Daniel Kharlamov, Brandon Woodard, Liudmila Tahai, and Krzysztof Pietroszek. 2016. TickTockRay: smartwatch-based 3D pointing for smartphone-based virtual reality. In Proc. of the 22nd ACM Conference on Virtual Reality Software and Technology. ACM, 363--364. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. JJ-W Lin, Henry Been-Lirn Duh, Donald E Parker, Habib Abi-Rached, and Thomas A Furness. 2002. Effects of field of view on presence, enjoyment, memory, and simulator sickness in a virtual environment. In Virtual Reality, 2002. Proceedings. IEEE. IEEE, 164--171. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Kent Lyons. 2016. 2D Input for Virtual Reality Enclosures with Magnetic Field Sensing. In Proc.of the 2016 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC '16). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 176--183. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Nasa. 2018. Task Load Index (Nasa-TLX). (2018). Retrieved January 5, 2018 from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs. nasa.gov/20000021487.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Krzysztof Pietroszek, Liudmila Tahai, James R Wallace, and Edward Lank. 2017. Watchcasting: Freehand 3D interaction with off-the-shelf smartwatch. In 3D User Interfaces (3DUI), 2017 IEEE Symposium on. IEEE, 172--175.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Boris Smus and Christopher Riederer. 2015. Magnetic Input for Mobile Virtual Reality. In Proc.of the 2015 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers (ISWC '15). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 43--44. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Christian Winkler, Ken Pfeuffer, and Enrico Rukzio. 2012. Investigating Mid-air Pointing Interaction for Projector Phones. In Proc.of the 2012 ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (ITS '12). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 85--94. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. WatchVR: Exploring the Usage of a Smartwatch for Interaction in Mobile Virtual Reality

    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 EA '18: Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
      April 2018
      3155 pages
      ISBN:9781450356213
      DOI:10.1145/3170427

      Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 20 April 2018

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • abstract

      Acceptance Rates

      CHI EA '18 Paper Acceptance Rate1,208of3,955submissions,31%Overall Acceptance Rate6,164of23,696submissions,26%

      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