Next Issue
Volume 5, March
Previous Issue
Volume 5, January
 
 

Multimodal Technol. Interact., Volume 5, Issue 2 (February 2021) – 2 articles

  • Issues are regarded as officially published after their release is announced to the table of contents alert mailing list.
  • You may sign up for e-mail alerts to receive table of contents of newly released issues.
  • PDF is the official format for papers published in both, html and pdf forms. To view the papers in pdf format, click on the "PDF Full-text" link, and use the free Adobe Reader to open them.
Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
23 pages, 45251 KiB  
Article
StARboard & TrACTOr: Actuated Tangibles in an Educational TAR Application
by Emanuel Vonach, Christoph Schindler and Hannes Kaufmann
Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2021, 5(2), 6; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/mti5020006 - 09 Feb 2021
Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3731
Abstract
We explore the potential of direct haptic interaction in a novel approach to Tangible Augmented Reality in an educational context. Employing our prototyping platform ACTO, we developed a tabletop Augmented Reality application StARboard for sailing students. In this personal viewpoint environment virtual objects, [...] Read more.
We explore the potential of direct haptic interaction in a novel approach to Tangible Augmented Reality in an educational context. Employing our prototyping platform ACTO, we developed a tabletop Augmented Reality application StARboard for sailing students. In this personal viewpoint environment virtual objects, e.g., sailing ships, are physically represented by actuated micro robots. These align with virtual objects, allowing direct physical interaction with the scene. When a user tries to pick up a virtual ship, its physical robot counterpart is grabbed instead. We also developed a tracking solution TrACTOr, employing a depth sensor to allow tracking independent of the table surface. In this paper we present concept and development of StARboard and TrACTOr. We report results of our user study with 18 participants using our prototype. They show that direct haptic interaction in tabletop AR scores en-par with traditional mouse interaction on a desktop setup in usability (mean SUS = 86.7 vs. 82.9) and performance (mean RTLX = 15.0 vs. 14.8), while outperforming the mouse in factors related to learning like presence (mean 6.0 vs 3.1) and absorption (mean 5.4 vs. 4.2). It was also rated the most fun (13× vs. 0×) and most suitable for learning (9× vs. 4×). Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue 3D Human–Computer Interaction)
Show Figures

Figure 1

21 pages, 1496 KiB  
Article
The Role of Steps and Game Elements in Gamified Fitness Tracker Apps: A Systematic Review
by Aatish Neupane, Derek Hansen, Jerry Alan Fails and Anud Sharma
Multimodal Technol. Interact. 2021, 5(2), 5; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/mti5020005 - 22 Jan 2021
Cited by 11 | Viewed by 7144
Abstract
This article reviews 103 gamified fitness tracker apps (Android and iOS) that incorporate step count data into gameplay. Games are labeled with a set of 13 game elements as well as meta-data from the app stores (e.g., avg rating, number of reviews). Network [...] Read more.
This article reviews 103 gamified fitness tracker apps (Android and iOS) that incorporate step count data into gameplay. Games are labeled with a set of 13 game elements as well as meta-data from the app stores (e.g., avg rating, number of reviews). Network clustering and visualizations are used to identify the relationship between game elements that occur in the same games. A taxonomy of how steps are used as rewards is provided, along with example games. An existing taxonomy of how games use currency is also mapped to step-based games. We show that many games use the triad of Social Influence, Competition, and Challenges, with Social Influence being the most common game element. We also identify holes in the design space, such as games that include a Plot element (e.g., Collaboration and Plot only co-occur in one game). Games that use Real-Life Incentives (e.g., allow you to translate steps into dollars or discounts) were surprisingly common, but relatively simple in their gameplay. We differentiate between task-contingent rewards (including completion-contingent and engagement-contingent) and performance-contingent rewards, illustrating the differences with fitness apps. We also demonstrate the value of treating steps as currency by mapping an existing currency-based taxonomy onto step-based games and providing illustrations of nine different categories. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Personal Health, Fitness Technologies, and Games)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Previous Issue
Next Issue
Back to TopTop