Paper detail

Methodology to Assess Quality, Presence, Empathy, Attitude, and Attention in 360-degree Videos for Immersive Communications

This paper analyzes the joint assessment of quality, spatial and social presence, empathy, attitude, and attention in three conditions: (A)visualizing and rating the quality of contents in a Head-Mounted Display (HMD), (B)visualizing the contents in an HMD,and (C)visualizing the contents in an HMD where participants can see their hands and take notes. The experiment simulates an immersive communication where participants attend conversations of different genres and from different acquisition perspectives in the context of international experiences. Video quality is evaluated with Single-Stimulus Discrete Quality Evaluation (SSDQE) methodology. Spatial and social presence are evaluated with questionnaires adapted from the literature. Initial empathy is assessed with Interpersonal Reactivity Index(IRI) and a questionnaire is designed to evaluate attitude. Attention is evaluated with 3 questions that had pass/fail answers. 54 participants were evenly distributed among A, B, and C conditions taking into account their international experience backgrounds, obtaining a diverse sample of participants. The results from the subjective test validate the proposed methodology in VR communications, showing that video quality experiments can be adapted to conditions imposed by experiments focused on the evaluation of socioemotional features in terms of contents of long-duration, actor and observer acquisition perspectives, and genre. In addition, the positive results related to the sense of presence imply that technology can be relevant in the analyzed use case. The acquisition perspective greatly influences social presence and all the contents have a positive impact on all participants on their attitude towards international experiences. The annotated dataset, Student Experiences Around the World dataset (SEAW-dataset), obtained from the experiment is made publicly available.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.