Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

David Thery

dblp:210/5838 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2019
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer graphics and multimedia
1 paper
Virtual and augmented reality · 100%
Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Usability and user experience research · 100%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Virtual and augmented reality › virtual environment
immersive environment
0.412019
Spatial Presence in Real and Remote Immersive Environments · VR 2019
Virtual and augmented reality › presence
spatial presence
0.412019
Spatial Presence in Real and Remote Immersive Environments · VR 2019
Virtual and augmented reality
telepresence
0.412019
Spatial Presence in Real and Remote Immersive Environments · VR 2019
Usability and user experience research
user behavior analysis
0.112019
Spatial Presence in Real and Remote Immersive Environments · VR 2019

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

questionnaire (ITC-SOPI) · 0.8head trajectory analysis · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2019 Spatial Presence in Real and Remote Immersive Environments
abstract
This paper presents an experiment assessing the feeling of spatial presence in both real and remote environments (respectively the socalled “natural presence” and “telepresence”). Twenty-eight (28) participants performed a 3D-pointing task while being located in a real office and the same office remotely rendered over HMD. The spatial presence was evaluated by means of the ITC-SOPI questionnaire and users' behaviour analysis (trajectories of head during the task). The analysis also included the effect of different levels of immersion of the system - visual-only versus visual and audio - rendering in such environments. The results show a higher sense of spatial presence for the remote condition, regardless of the degree of immersion, and for the “visual and audio” condition regardless of the environment. Additionally, trajectory analysis of users' heads reveals that participants behaved similarly in both environments.
Nawel Khenak, Jean-Marc Vézien, David Thery, Patrick Bourdot
VR3