Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2401.14920

Hold Tight: Identifying Behavioral Patterns During Prolonged Work in VR through Video Analysis

Abstract

VR devices have recently been actively promoted as tools for knowledge workers and prior work has demonstrated that VR can support some knowledge worker tasks. However, only a few studies have explored the effects of prolonged use of VR such as a study observing 16 participant working in VR and a physical environment for one work-week each and reporting mainly on subjective feedback. As a nuanced understanding of participants' behavior in VR and how it evolves over time is still missing, we report on the results from an analysis of 559 hours of video material obtained in this prior study. Among other findings, we report that (1) the frequency of actions related to adjusting the headset reduced by 46% and the frequency of actions related to supporting the headset reduced by 42% over the five days; (2) the HMD was removed 31% less frequently over the five days but for 41% longer periods; (3) wearing an HMD is disruptive to normal patterns of eating and drinking, but not to social interactions, such as talking. The combined findings in this work demonstrate the value of long-term studies of deployed VR systems and can be used to inform the design of better, more ergonomic VR systems as tools for knowledge workers.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Verena Biener, Forouzan Farzinnejad, Rinaldo Schuster, Seyedmasih Tabaei, Leon Lindlein, Jinghui Hu, Negar Nouri, John J. Dudley, Per Ola Kristensson, Jörg Müller, Jens Grubert. 2024-01-29. Hold Tight: Identifying Behavioral Patterns During Prolonged Work in VR through Video Analysis. https://arxiv.org/abs/2401.14920

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Explanation Navigator: Rectifying Out-of-Scope Human Interpretations of Leaky AI Explanations through Conversational Guidance

As explanations of artificial intelligence systems proliferate, their recipients must grasp not only what they convey but also recognise what they cannot. We conducted an interview study with nine participants to examine how explainees reason when their information needs exceed the scope of available explanations. Participants often unwittingly confabulated explanatory insights when relevant information was missing from the explanations, not recognising the inherent limitations thereof. We characterise such explanations as leaky explanations -- simplifications that strive to hide complexity yet whose correct interpretation hinges on understanding of the concealed details. To address out-of-scope interpretations we propose Explanation Navigator: a conversational interaction framework that detects mismatches between users' information needs and explanations' content, elucidating pertinent yet implicit details and providing complementary explanations for unmet information needs. An online study with 316 participants showed that our approach allowed explainees to recognise and rectify confabulated explanatory insights, guiding them towards developing correct understanding.

cs.HC

Biased AI improves human performance but reduces perceived helpfulness

Artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly shapes how people think, engage, and evaluate information. To minimize risk, most current systems are designed to present as ideologically neutral with standardized output. Yet growing evidence suggests that these principles suppress cognitive engagement, impair human decision-making, and erode societal diversity. Here we test the opposite approach by deliberately injecting bias into AI assistants. In three randomized experiments with 5,000 participants, biased AI improved human performance relative to default and neutral AI in tasks ranging from misinformation evaluation and financial investment to graduate education. These gains carried a subjective cost. Participants systematically undervalued AI they believed to be biased and inflated the helpfulness of AI they believed to be neutral, regardless of the systems' actual behavior. Interacting with two AIs whose biases flanked the participant's own perspective preserved the performance gains while limiting the subjective cost and one-sided influence. Our findings reveal the strategic value of intentional bias in AI design. Rather than performing a single fair, reliable, and authoritative voice, AI that speaks from specific viewpoints triggers cognitive agency and elevates human-AI performance in judgment, decision-making, and problem-solving.

cs.HC

Learning Password Best Practices Through In-Task Instruction

Users often make security- and privacy-relevant decisions without a clear understanding of the rules that govern safe behavior. We introduce pedagogical friction, a design approach that inserts brief, instructional interactions at the moment of action. We evaluate this approach in the context of password creation, a familiar task with clear quality criteria. We conducted a randomized study with 128 participants across four interface conditions that varied the depth and interactivity of guidance. We assessed three outcomes: (1) rule compliance in a subsequent password task without guidance, (2) accuracy on survey questions tied to password rules, and (3) behavior-knowledge alignment, which captures whether participants who correctly followed a rule also recognized it on the survey. Across the guided conditions, participants corrected most rule violations in the follow-up task and showed high behavior-knowledge alignment. Survey results suggested clearer advantages for some rule types, especially symbol related questions. These results position pedagogical friction as a lightweight intervention for security- and privacy-critical interfaces.

cs.HC