Supplementary Data: A User Study on the Comparison of View Interfaces for VR-AR Communication in XR Remote Collaboration
Description
Previous studies have investigated which context-sharing interfaces are effective in improving task performance during remote collaboration; however, consistent results have yet to be found. In this study, we developed a convenient three-in-one remote collaboration system that provides multiple context-sharing interfaces in a single platform (2D video, 360° video, and 3D reconstruction view). All interfaces can reflect live updates of environmental changes, and we aimed to clarify the effect of the interface on the quality of remote collaboration. Thirty participants were recruited to perform a target-finding-and-placing scenario. Using both objective (completion time and moving distance) and subjective (General Collaborative Experience, NASA Task Load Index, System Usability Scale, Simulator Sickness Questionnaire, and preference rank) metrics, we compared the task performance among the three interface conditions. The results showed that participants completed the task faster and reported a better collaborative experience in the 3D interface condition. Moreover, we found a strong preference for the 3D view interface. These results suggest that providing 3D reconstructed spatial information can enable remote experts to instruct local workers more effectively.
Files
Steps to reproduce
The results of the Shapiro-Wilk test indicated violations of the normal distribution. Therefore, we performed the Friedman test for task performance (completion time and moving distance) and questionnaires (GEC, NASA-TLX, SUS, and SSQ) as well as the chi-squared test for preference rank. The Friedman test was used to examine the effect of context-sharing interfaces (2D vs. 360° video vs. 3D reconstruction view).