The questions revolve the user’s feeling of the virtual arm as well as their experience. The questions are covering the same topic as the narrative related questions; this is done to ensure the validity of the answers and the expose any misinterpretations by the researchers. The questions were formulated as the following points; see the Appendix for an example. Was it difficult to adjust to the virtual environment? Upon entering the lab, was the scenography something you would expect to see? Was the scenography of the lab, something you would expect to be used the virtual world During the test I felt as if the virtual arm resembled my own arm to an extent that I did not pay attention to the difference when performing a task. Could you focus on the task at hand and “forget” the screen providing visual feedback Were you able to correctly anticipate what would happen as a “system response” to the actions you performed? How involved were you in the virtual environment experience? How did you perceive the sound “in the virtual world” in terms of being insufficient? During the experiment there were moments in which I “felt” as if my real arm was becoming the virtual one. How much delay did you experience between your actions and expected outcomes? Which item was the most difficult to retrieve? Was the experience as a whole (the scenography of the lab, the narrative and the VR) confusing? Results This chapter is divided into three parts, one with expected results, the second part with the presented results and the last with a discussion of the results. Expected Results This section concerns the presentation of the expected results from the test, based upon several pilot tests of the different parts of the interface and the system as a whole. The first part will cover the narrative related questions, used in phase 0 to 5 (TBCA table), the second part revolves the phase 6 interview. The last part will cover the questionnaire. Narrative related questions The presence experience is expected to produce the following results from the observation and narrative related interview, not to be confused with the final interview in phase 6.
S2: Not too much aware of the display, had problems with depth perception. Had to lean forward sometimes and got close to the screen. S3: Mechanical delay when rotating. S4: Was not aware S5: To some extend (thinks that the hands projected on the screen is pre recorded animation) S6: Not at all S7: S8: Did not mind S9: not aware of the display S10: the delay of the arm interrupted the flow in some moments. Q4) - How compelling was your sense of moving around inside the virtual environment? S1: Cool S2: Interesting, slow – I can adapt to the slowness. S3: Chair rotation delay, but compelling. Representation of the arm/hand on the screen is cool. S4: Was afraid to fall of the chair, but I had fun. Had the sense of being in the same room due to audio. Believed, that the remote location was on the other side of the occluding scenography and not several meters away. S5: Is cool S6: I can use whatever and hit other things. S7: Was interested and looked for details. S8: Compelling S9: Compelling S10: Compelling (could not tell where the room location, only that it was on the 2nd floor due to the window.) Q5) - How well could you move or manipulate objects in the virtual environment?