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

Janne Kaeder

dblp:389/7646 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
1as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none

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

Graphics, computer vision, multimedia, augmented reality and games · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Human-computer interaction and ubiquitous computing · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021

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.

Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper
Immersive interaction · 44% Usability and user experience research · 44% Collaborative and social computing · 13%

Topics — the 2 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Usability and user experience research › user perception
social acceptability
0.812024
Working with Mixed Reality in Public: Effects of Virtual Display Layouts on Productivity, Feeling of Safety, and Social Acceptability · ISMAR 2024
Collaborative and social computing › remote work
mobile work
0.212024
Working with Mixed Reality in Public: Effects of Virtual Display Layouts on Productivity, Feeling of Safety, and Social Acceptability · ISMAR 2024

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

repeated measures ANOVA · 0.8field study · 0.8
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2024 Working with Mixed Reality in Public: Effects of Virtual Display Layouts on Productivity, Feeling of Safety, and Social Acceptability
abstract
Nowadays, Mixed Reality (MR) headsets are a game-changer for knowledge work. Unlike stationary monitors, MR headsets allow users to work with large virtual displays anywhere they wear the headset, whether in a professional office, a public setting like a cafe, or a quiet space like a library. This study compares four different layouts (eye level-close, eye level-far, below eye level-close, below eye level-far) of virtual displays regarding feelings of safety, perceived productivity, and social acceptability when working with MR in public. We test which layout is most preferred by users and seek to understand which factors affect users’ layout preferences. The aim is to derive useful insights for designing better MR layouts. A field study in a public library was conducted using a within-subject design. While the participants interact with a layout, they are asked to work on a planning task. The results from a repeated measure ANOVA show a statistically significant effect on productivity but not on safety and social acceptability. Additionally, we report preferences expressed by the users regarding the layouts and using MR in public.
Janne Kaeder, Maurizio Vergari, Verena Biener, Tanja Kojic, Jens Grubert, Sebastian Möller 0001, Jan-Niklas Voigt-Antons
ISMAR1