Display Methods

The average survey results for the modules with different display methods are presented in this sub-subsection. Figure 3-19 shows the average scores for the neurotypical users and Figure 3-20 shows the average scores for individuals with ASD. Curtain display had higher scores for the ease of interaction for both population groups. The tiredness values were lower for the curtain display for neurotypical individuals as well as individuals with ASD. This was a predicted result since the tasks performed with curtain display required low or no effort. The detailed statistical analysis revealed that for neurotypical users there were significant differences for the ease of interaction, enjoyment, frustrating and tiredness aspects. The performance scores for both population

78

groups can be seen in Figure 3-21. Although there was no significant difference between these scores, individuals from both population groups received higher scores in the modules with the HMD as compared to the modules with the curtain display. For the details of the statistical analysis, please see Appendix E.

Figure 3-19: Survey results for the display methods in the VR4VR system for neurotypical individuals.

After training, users were inquired about their preference of the display methods: head mounted display and curtain screen. These preference results are presented in Figure 3-22. Most of the participants with ASD stated preference for the curtain display while less participants with ASD stated preference for the head-mounted display. On the other hand, for the neurotypical users, the preference results indicated the opposite.

1 2 3 4 5 Average of Ease of Interaction Average of Enjoyment Average of Frustration Average of Tiredness Average of Immersion A ve ra ge Score Metric

Neurotypical - Display Method

79

Figure 3-20: Survey results for the display methods in the VR4VR system for individuals with ASD.

Figure 3-21: Performance scores for the different display methods in the VR4VR system for both populations

1 2 3 4 5 Average of Ease

of Interaction Average ofEnjoyment Average ofFrustration Average ofTiredness Average ofImmersion

A ve ra ge Score Metric

ASD - Display Method

Curtain HMD 0 20 40 60 80 100 Curtain HMD A ver ag e Sco re Display Method Scores Neurotypical ASD

80

Three out of the nine participants with ASD declared that they felt dizzy and nauseous during and/or after the testing while using the head mounted display. Similarly, four of the ten neurotypical individuals declared that they felt dizzy and nauseous during and/or after the testing while using the head mounted display. Only one participant from each population stated feeling dizzy and/or nauseous while using the curtain screen.

Figure 3-22: Preference of the users on the display methods in the VR4VR system.

As the individuals with ASD were asked about their opinions on the HMD display, only one of them stated that they did not like the concept of the HMD due to its resemblance to a television that was placed very near. The user also stated that their nearsightedness might be the cause of them finding it a bit annoying to use the HMD. Other than that, no users with ASD stated any negative comments about the HMD. We did not observe any problems in the individuals with autism’s acceptance of the HMD. All users with ASD made positive comments about the curtain display method.

0 2 4 6 8 10 Curtain HMD

Display Methods Preferences

81

Although they were a little bit anxious about the HMD acceptance of individuals with autism, the job trainers did not observe any negative effects of the HMD on users as well. They stated that it was reasonable to continue using HMD as a display for individuals with autism in the VR4VR system, since the users were very quick to adapt to using the HMD although none of them had any prior experience of using it. The job trainers stated positive comments about the curtain display as well.

Below, the user comments stated in the surveys for the locomotion, interaction and display aspects of the VR4VR system are shared for the neurotypical users. Individuals with ASD did not fill out these sections of the surveys and thus were interviewed about these aspects afterwards.

Question: “Have you ever felt limited/restricted while using any of the display/interaction methods? If so, please describe the situation and what made you feel limited.”

 UserID 4: “The walk steps made me feel limited and tired.”  UserID 6: “I can’t walk very well.”

 UserID 8: “Head mounted display, there was some kind of inconvenience not able to move quickly and properly and confidently as well.”

 UserID 10: “I felt limited while I was trying to walk in the parking lot.”  UserID 11: “Field of view on head mounted device too narrow. 3D mouse

felt strange for 2D application.”

 UserID 12: “Yes, walking was a little slow, maybe make more adjustable speeds.”

82

 UserID 13: “When loading the back of the truck, some of the finer motions were difficult to perform.”

Question: “Please describe the most positive experience you had while using the VR4VR system.”

 UserID 6: “The tangible boxes were pretty nice. I felt this will help people a lot. I really enjoyed it.”

 UserID 10: “The most positive experience was the interaction between the real world and the virtual world.”

 UserID 12: “The interactions with the head mounted display.”  UserID 13: “Tangible boxes, the tracking is very good.”

Question: “Please describe the most negative experience you had while using the VR4VR system.”

 UserID 12: “Walking.”