Search for: All records

Smart devices and Internet of Things (IoT) technologies are replacing or being incorporated into traditional devices at a growing pace. The use of digital interfaces to interact with these devices has become a common occurrence in homes, work spaces, and various industries around the world. The most common interfaces for these connected devices focus on mobile apps or voice control via intelligent virtual assistants. However, with augmented reality (AR) becoming more popular and accessible among consumers, there are new opportunities for spatial user interfaces to seamlessly bridge the gap between digital and physical affordances. In this paper, we present a human-subject study evaluating and comparing four user interfaces for smart connected environments: gaze input, hand gestures, voice input, and a mobile app. We assessed participants’ user experience, usability, task load, completion time, and preferences. Our results show multiple trade-offs between these interfaces across these measures. In particular, we found that gaze input shows great potential for future use cases, while both gaze input and hand gestures suffer from limited familiarity among users, compared to voice input and mobile apps. 

Background. Simulation has revolutionized teaching and learning. However, traditional manikins are limited in their ability to exhibit emotions, movements, and interactive eye gaze. As a result, students struggle with immersion and may be unable to authentically relate to the patient. Intervention. We developed a new type of patient simulator called the Physical-Virtual Patients (PVP) which combines the physicality of manikins with the richness of dynamic visuals. The PVP uses spatial Augmented Reality to rear project dynamic imagery (e.g., facial expressions, ptosis, pupil reactions) on a semi-transparent physical shell. The shell occupies space and matches the dimensions of a human head. Methods. We compared two groups of third semester nursing students (N=59) from a baccalaureate program using a between-participant design, one group interacting with a traditional high-fidelity manikin versus a more realistic PVP head. The learners had to perform a neurological assessment. We measured authenticity, urgency, and learning. Results. Learners had a more realistic encounter with the PVP patient (p=0.046), they were more engaged with the PVP condition compared to the manikin in terms of authenticity of encounter and cognitive strategies. The PVP provoked a higher sense of urgency (p=0.002). There was increased learning for the PVP group compared to the manikin group on the pre and post-simulation scores (p=0.027). Conclusion. The realism of the visuals in the PVP increases authenticity and engagement which results in a greater sense of urgency and overall learning.