Interactive Feedback Usability Test Spring 2025

Usability plan for in class activity

Content added by Vishaka for Spring 2025 Project 1, on 2/23/2025

Objective

Evaluate how individual interactive feedback vs physical setting feedback patterns influence user perception of AR visualizations. 

Research goals

• Understand user engagement with models that have different interaction patterns

• Learn about what types of feedback help/detract with physical immersiveness in AR

Test environment

• HMDs

• Links to software environments to test out (Bezi)

• Split participants into 2 groups 

  • Group A: Load model that has interactive feedback (audio/visual/haptic)

  • Group B: Load model that has onboarding information about surroundings (visual/physical)

Test setup/agenda

• (30 minutes, aiming for 25 with a 5 minute buffer)

• 5 minutes - Introduce agenda

• Split participants into 2 groups, one that explores a model with interface feedback and the other which has kinesthetic feedback

• 5 minutes - Setup instructions and time to set up headsets

• 5+ minutes - Exploration time (Will be taking down notes, pictures during this time)

• 10 minutes - Feedback time (take notes, pictures during this time)

Planned tasks

• Find a way to select one of the three items in this experience. 

• Adjust your view so the object is facing away from you (180 degrees)

• Find a way to learn more about the item in front of you

• Find a way to deselect the item, and select a new one. 

Planned feedback form

• Goal: Understand user engagement with models that have different interaction patterns

  • Which nature model did you initially select? [Single select]

    • Did you explore any others? [Open-ended]

  • Overall, how would you rate your familiarity with each nature model after this activity?  [Likert low familiarity-high familiarity]

  • How would you rate your success with each task? [Likert low performance-high performance]

• Goal: Learn about what types of feedback help/detract with physical immersiveness in AR

  • How would you rate your mental load with each task? [Likert low load-high load]

  • Were any of the tasks particularly complex? Or simple? [Open-ended]

  • How would you rate your physical activity load with each task? [Likert low load-high load]

  • Were any of the tasks particularly demanding? Or easily achievable? [Open-ended]

Results

This slide deck goes over my main findings, but they are also summarized below. 

Spatial prototype

• More users initially chose to interact with the model in the middle

• Not all users got to interact with all the models in this experience, which could be attributed to being more immersed in one specific model

• There were mixed success rates with each task, with it being harder to touch the model for more information and to go to a different model, since the prototype took up a large space.

• There was still low-medium physical activity, but definitely more than the UI prototype.

UI prototype

• Most users initially interacted with the left most model, aligning with common UI patterns, where on screen interfaces, the top left corner is most important to users.

• All users got through viewing all models in this experience, which could be attributed to the low physical load for this prototype

• Users had higher averages overall for their familiarity ratings with each model

• There were mixed success rates on certain tasks, like getting more information (since this was a click+hold task)

• Overall, low mental and physical load

Overall feedback

• The animations of models growing as you approach them felt jarring

• There needed to be affordances for hand/body colliders

• There were bugs with the audio

• Positive feedback for both experiences!

• Spatial prototype:

  •     The audio was compelling

  •     Felt more interactive

  •     Not enough space for the prototype

  •     Was straightforward to interact with

  •     There was higher physical exertion

  •     Instructions were hard to read without a background

  •     Hard to anticipate audio length

  •     Wanted to adjust scale

• UI prototype

  •     Models felt far for viewing

  •     Still some issues with reading text

  •     Refined look of UI made it easy to navigate

  •     Its easy to forget controls

  •     Click + hold felt unintuitive

  •     Easy to switch between models

  •     Wanted to look at models closer