Consumer Subjective Impressions in Virtual Reality Environments

Version	Summary	Created by	Modification	Content Size	Created at	Operation
1		Manuel Contero	--	1304	2023-07-31 19:54:47	\|
2	format correct	Catherine Yang	Meta information modification	1304	2023-08-01 02:53:20	\|

This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/electronics12143051

The availability and affordability of consumer virtual reality (VR) devices have fueled their adoption during the product design process. High fidelity virtual prototypes can be created more quickly and are more cost-effective than using traditional methods, but certain product features are still difficult to evaluate, resulting in perceptual differences when a product is assessed using different visualization techniques.

virtual reality perception interaction subjective impressions

1. Introduction

Different key factors can help to ensure the success of a product apart from aesthetics ^[1], such as a strong market orientation, a clear and compelling product concept, a well-designed development process, and its evaluation, especially during the early stages of the design process ^[2]. In this context, ensuring a precise perception of a product’s features is crucial to guarantee an accurate evaluation of it ^[3]. The increasing competitiveness of the market is causing traditional forms of interaction with the product to be replaced by digital means ^[4], and the way that products are presented is becoming increasingly important for the optimization of the design process. In this regard, it is crucial to understand our perception of virtual prototypes in order to interact efficiently with it ^[5], since nowadays, the presentation medium is also considered an important factor for the success of a product ^[6].

With the advancement of virtual reality (VR) devices, virtual prototyping (VP) is gaining popularity in different fields ^[7]^[8]. The availability and affordability of VR standalone head-mounted displays (HMD), e.g., Quest 2 or Pico 4, have fueled their adoption in product design and are becoming more prevalent among product designers ^[9]^[10]. The metaverse is changing how products are designed, as gaining feedback from potential users during the design process can also be more cost-effective when physical prototypes are not necessarily needed for concept validation (especially in the early stages of the product development process). For example, there are various VR applications that facilitate the design process when individuals are not physically present in the same space. For instance, ShapeXR incorporates features such as eye-tracking and facial tracking to enhance interaction and communication among collaborators ^[11], or Microsoft Maquette, a general purpose mock-up tool for spatial prototyping within virtual reality ^[12].

In this context, VP is becoming an affordable and versatile alternative to physical prototyping ^[13], as it involves less time and money than traditional methods.

Although VR was proposed as a new tool in engineering design many years ago ^[14], it has gained increasing popularity in recent years as a powerful tool for product development given the technological advances ^[10], especially during the early stages, when many design variations must be produced ^[13]^[15]. This technology allows designers to create immersive virtual environments (VE) to evaluate different design concepts through VP, which provides a more efficient, versatile and cost-effective way to assess new products ^[13]. Virtual prototypes are easy to modify and share ^[16], and designers can test different design options in real time without the need for physical prototypes. Concepts can be visualized and tested in a realistic and interactive way, which can lead to more accurate and effective product design as it is positively affected by the user’s confidence and accuracy in the assessment ^[17]. Additionally, VR can facilitate the evaluation of virtual products in a more natural and intuitive way, as users can interact with them in a similar way to how they would interact with real products ^[18]. However, some product features are difficult to evaluate ^[19], as VE may not provide the same level of realism as real-world settings, or they may not accurately reproduce the tactile feedback that users experience when interacting with physical products. This can affect how users perceive and evaluate the products in a VE ^[20]^[21].

The introduction of haptic feedback in the VE can be particularly useful in the product design process ^[16]. Passive haptics provide a sense of touch in VR by synchronizing physical objects to virtual assets ^[22], significantly reducing costs without the use of intrusive devices, just the user’s hands. This has been shown to increase the sense of presence, improve cognitive mapping of the environment, and improve training performance ^[23]. In this context, passive haptics can be less expensive and easier to implement than active haptics, as it does not require the use of physical devices ^[24], which makes it more comfortable. Additionally, the introduction, and recent improvement, of hand-tracking in VR standalone HMD provides a more natural, intuitive and positive virtual experience ^[25]. With hand-tracking, users can interact with virtual objects using natural hand gestures and movements, rather than using a controller or other external input device. This can help to make the VR experience feel more realistic and allow users to more easily navigate and interact with virtual content.

The use of VR in product design, especially with the incorporation of passive haptic feedback through hand-tracking, has the potential to revolutionize the way products are designed and evaluated; however, assessing products in a VE can be challenging for several reasons.

2. Consumer Subjective Impressions in Virtual Reality Environments: The Role of the Visualization Technique in Product Evaluation

VR is currently portrayed as a powerful tool for design ^[26] and product presentation ^[27]^[28]. It enables interactions within a VE that are far more effective than those made possible by traditional approaches such as sketches, renderings, or real images of the product ^[29]. This allows for more natural and accurate evaluations, likely to the perception one would have when viewing the real product. Despite this potential, there are certain limitations, as it may not be able to provide the same level of realism as a real environment, potentially resulting in significant perceptual differences and distorting the opinions of viewers.

Söderman was one of the first authors to make advances in this field ^[30]^[31]. Despite the results (no perceptual differences were found between the visualization techniques used), subsequent studies have proven that the visual media can have a significant effect on the user’s subjective impressions, considering the limitations of previous studies ^[32].

With the emergence of new visualization methods, some authors decided to analyze how immersive VR environments (with the use of an HMD) impact the user’s subjective impressions. For example, Felip et al. discovered that those features of the product evaluated through touch were the most susceptible to being affected by the medium ^[33]. Generally, these studies presented a significant limitation: the evaluation of a single product, which makes it difficult to extrapolate their conclusions to an entire type of product ^[18]. In this context, Palacios-Ibáñez et al. carried out similar studies by increasing the number of alternatives ^[3]^[34]. The authors corroborate that product features such as size (Large–Small) or weight (Heavy–Light) are susceptible to being affected by the visualization technique, but characteristics associated with the aesthetics of the product can also be influenced by the medium depending on the type of product. In addition, they also noted that the form of evaluation was an important factor when analyzing perceptual differences between sets of objects, as a joint evaluation helps to minimize differences between media.

In this case, several studies have shown that feeling the touch of physical objects in VE can improve global immersion, knowledge about the spatial environment, and users’ sense of presence ^[23]^[35]. Passive haptics can help to ensure that those features related to touch are not severely affected during the evaluation of a VP ^[21]. However, the absence of a virtual model of the hands can complicate the evaluation of the product to some extent, due to the lack of a real-time correspondence between the subject’s real hands and the VE.

More recent studies have introduced the hand-tracking technique during the virtual experience ^[20] thanks to the development of low-cost autonomous HMDs, demonstrating that the introduction of passive haptics during evaluation in a VE can be an effective tool for the evaluation of virtual prototypes and that the user’s background could influence the evaluation of some product features. However, it would be necessary to observe if this is also true for other types of products.

References

Chen, Y. Neurological effect of the aesthetics of product design on the decision-making process of consumers. NeuroQuantology 2018, 16, 501–506.
Cooper, R.G. The drivers of success in new-product development. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2019, 76, 36–47.
Palacios-Ibáñez, A.; Pirault, S.; Ochando-Marti, F.; Contero, M.; Camba, J.D. An Examination of the Relationship between Visualization Media and Consumer Product Evaluation. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 2023, 1–15.
Jiang, Z.; Benbasat, I. Investigating the influence of the functional mechanisms of online product presentations. Inf. Syst. Res. 2007, 18, 454–470.
Hornsey, R.L.; Hibbard, P.B.; Scarfe, P. Size and shape constancy in consumer virtual reality. Behav. Res. Methods 2020, 52, 1587–1598.
Yoo, J.; Kim, M. The effects of online product presentation on consumer responses: A mental imagery perspective. J. Bus. Res. 2014, 67, 2464–2472.
Ludlow, B.L. Virtual Reality: Emerging Applications and Future Directions. Rural. Spec. Educ. Q. 2015, 34, 3–10.
Aziz, H. Virtual Reality Programs Applications in Healthcare. J. Heal. Med. Inform. 2018, 9, 305.
Meta: Introducing Meta: A Social Technology Company. Available online: https://about.fb.com/news/2021/10/facebook-company-is-now-meta/ (accessed on 25 February 2022).
Berni, A.; Borgianni, Y. Applications of Virtual Reality in Engineering and Product Design: Why, What, How, When and Where. Electronics 2020, 9, 1064.
Shapes Corp. Quest Pro update with eye and face tracking for avatars, colored MR and stylus. Available online: https://www.shapesxr.com/post/new-avatars-eye-and-mouth-tracking-color-passthrough-stylus-and-more (accessed on 3 July 2023).
Corporation, M. Microsoft Maquette. Available online: https://apps.microsoft.com/store/detail/microsoft-maquette/9NGD2SNL8Z4W?hl=en-us&gl=us (accessed on 3 July 2023).
Cecil, J.; Kanchanapiboon, A. Virtual engineering approaches in product and process design. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2007, 31, 846–856.
Ottosson, S. Virtual reality in the product development process. J. Eng. Des. 2002, 13, 159–172.
Ye, J.; Campbell, R.I.; Page, T.; Badni, K.S. An investigation into the implementation of virtual reality technologies in support of conceptual design. Des. Stud. 2006, 27, 77–97.
Bordegoni, M. Product Virtualization: An Effective Method for the Evaluation of Concept Design of New Products. In Innovation in Product Design; Bordegoni, M., Rizzi, C., Eds.; Springer: London, UK, 2011; pp. 117–141.
Hannah, R.; Joshi, S.; Summers, J.D. A user study of interpretability of engineering design representations. J. Eng. Des. 2012, 23, 443–468.
Ye, J.; Badiyani, S.; Raja, V.; Schlegel, T. Applications of Virtual Reality in Product Design Evaluation. In Human-Computer Interaction; HCI Applications and Services; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007; pp. 1190–1199.
Chu, C.-H.; Kao, E.-T. A Comparative Study of Design Evaluation with Virtual Prototypes Versus a Physical Product. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4723.
Palacios-Ibáñez, A.; Alonso-García, M.; Contero, M.; Camba, J.D. The influence of hand tracking and haptic feedback for virtual prototype evaluation in the product design process. J. Mech. Des. 2022, 145, 041403.
Galán, J.; Felip, F.; García-García, C.; Contero, M. The influence of haptics when assessing household products presented in different means: A comparative study in real setting, flat display, and virtual reality environments with and without passive haptics. J. Comput. Des. Eng. 2021, 8, 330–342.
Lindeman, R.W.; Sibert, J.L.; Hahn, J.K. Hand-held windows: Towards effective 2D interaction in immersive virtual environments. In Proceedings of the IEEE Virtual Reality (Cat. No. 99CB36316), Houston, TX, USA, 13–17 March 1999; pp. 205–212.
Insko, B.E. Passive Haptics Significantly Enhances Virtual Environments; The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: Chapel Hill, NC, USA, 2001.
Jerald, J. What Is Virtual Reality? In The VR Book; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2015; p. 9.
Voigt-Antons, J.-N.; Kojic, T.; Ali, D.; Moller, S. Influence of Hand Tracking as a Way of Interaction in Virtual Reality on User Experience. In Proceedings of the 2020 Twelfth International Conference on Quality of Multimedia Experience (QoMEX), Athlone, Ireland, 26–28 May 2020; IEEE: Athlone, Ireland, 2020; pp. 1–4.
Rodríguez-Parada, L.; Pardo-Vicente, M.-Á.; Sánchez-calle, A.; Pavón-Domínguez, P. Conceptual Design Using Virtual Reality: Case Study with Portable Light. In Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 81–90.
Bordegoni, M.; Carulli, M. Evaluating Industrial Products in an Innovative Visual-Olfactory Environment. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. Eng. 2016, 16, 1–9.
Martínez-Navarro, J.; Bigné, E.; Guixeres, J.; Alcañiz, M.; Torrecilla, C. The influence of virtual reality in e-commerce. J. Bus. Res. 2019, 100, 475–482.
Jiang, Z.; Benbasat, I. The effects of presentation formats and task complexity on online consumers’ product understanding. MIS Q. Manag. Inf. Syst. 2007, 31, 475–500.
Söderman, M. Comparing Desktop Virtual Reality with handmade sketches and real products exploring key aspects for end-users’ understanding of proposed products. J. Des. Res. 2002, 2, 7–26.
Söderman, M. Virtual reality in product evaluations with potential customers: An exploratory study comparing virtual reality with conventional product representations. J. Eng. Des. 2005, 16, 311–328.
Artacho-Ramírez, M.A.; Diego-Mas, J.A.; Alcaide-Marzal, J. Influence of the mode of graphical representation on the perception of product aesthetic and emotional features: An exploratory study. Int. J. Ind. Ergon. 2008, 38, 942–952.
Felip, F.; Galán, J.; García-García, C.; Mulet, E. Influence of presentation means on industrial product evaluations with potential users: A first study by comparing tangible virtual reality and presenting a product in a real setting. Virtual Real. 2019, 24, 439–451.
Palacios-Ibáñez, A.; Navarro-Martínez, R.; Blasco-Esteban, J.; Contero, M.; Camba, J.D. On the application of extended reality technologies for the evaluation of product characteristics during the initial stages of the product development process. Comput. Ind. 2023, 144, 103780.
Azmandian, M.; Hancock, M.; Benko, H.; Ofek, E.; Wilson, A.D. Haptic Retargeting: Dynamic Repurposing of Passive Haptics for Enhanced Virtual Reality Experiences. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, San Jose, CA, USA, 7–12 May 2016; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2016; pp. 1968–1979.

© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.

Upload a video for this entry

Information

Subjects: Computer Science, Interdisciplinary Applications

Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :

Almudena Palacios-Ibáñez

Francisco Felip-Miralles

Julia Galán

Carlos García-García

Manuel Contero

View Times: 210

Update Date: 01 Aug 2023

Table of Contents

Video Upload Options

Confirm

1. Introduction

2. Consumer Subjective Impressions in Virtual Reality Environments: The Role of the Visualization Technique in Product Evaluation

References