Cited by 116Technology Use by Older AdultsVirtual Reality Applications and ImpactsSocial Robot Interaction and HRI

Interrogating Social Virtual Reality as a Communication Medium for Older Adults

Open access
Baker, Steven, Kelly, Ryan M., Waycott, Jenny, Carrasco, Romina, Hoang, Thuong, Batchelor, Frances, Ozanne, Elizabeth, Dow, Briony +2 more·2019·Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction

Abstract

A growing body of research is examining the way that virtual reality (VR) technology might enrich the lives of older adults. However, no studies have yet examined how this technology---combining head mounted displays, motion tracking, avatars, and virtual environments---might contribute to older adult wellbeing by facilitating greater social participation (social VR). To address this gap, we conducted three workshops in which 25 older adults aged 70 to 81 explored the utility of social VR as a medium for communicating with other older adults. Participants first created embodied avatars that were controlled through natural gestures, and subsequently used these avatars in two high-fidelity social VR prototypes. Findings from the workshops provide insight into older adults' design motivations when creating embodied avatars for social VR; their acceptance of social VR as a communication tool; and their views on how social VR might play a beneficial role in their lives. Outcomes from the workshops also illustrate the critical importance our participants placed onbehavioural anthropomorphism ---the embodied avatars' ability to speak, move, and act in a human-like manner--- alongsidetranslational factors, which encapsulate issues relating to the way physical movements are mapped to the embodied avatar and the way in which errors in these mappings may invoke ageing stereotypes. Findings demonstrate the critical role that these characteristics might play in the success of future social VR applications targeting older users. We translate our findings into a set of design considerations for developing social VR systems for older adults, and we reflect on how our participants' experiences can inform future research on social virtual reality.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3359251

Cites

79 of 79 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In recent years, there has been an increase in qualitative studies examining older adults' experiences and perceptions of IVR.

    “In recent years, we have also seen an increase in qualitative studies examining older adults’ experiences and perceptions of IVR [14-16].”
  • 11/13 of the studies described feedback on the content presented, with participants preferring still content to moving content, preferring familiar content similar to past experiences, showing a strong preference for tailoring content to their own interests, enjoying the adaptive nature of the content, suggesting more diversity in content, and giving only a few negative comments about content.

    “A total of 11/13 of the studies described feedback on the content presented, specifically the various objects and scenes inside the virtual environment and participants’ experiences navigating them [9,14-16,44,46-48,50-52]. Participants preferred still content to moving content [44,51] and preferred content that was familiar [52], in particular, content similar to past experiences in real life [44”
  • Perceptions of the audiovisual quality of IVR hardware varied across studies, with 5/13 of the studies reporting some form of audiovisual issue such as volume not being at the right level or not clear enough, or sound from the physical environment negatively affecting the IVR experience.

    “Perceptions of the audiovisual quality of IVR hardware varied across studies [14,16,45,48-52]. A total of 5/13 of the studies reported some form of audiovisual issue [14,45,49-51], with feedback that the volume was not at the right level or was not clear enough [45,49-51] or that sound coming from the physical environment could negatively affect the IVR experience [45].”
  • A study raised the issue that only the participant could be sure if the lenses were fitted correctly, with the researcher never being certain whether the image they were viewing was unclear or just not fitted correctly on the participant's head.

    “A study raised the issue that only the participant could be sure if the lenses were fitted correctly, with the researcher never being certain whether the image they were viewing was unclear or just not fitted correctly on the participant’s head [14].”
  • In 3/13 of the studies, the HMD was generally tolerated by participants.

    “Although a range of issues were raised regarding the HMD, 3/13 of the studies reported that the HMD was generally tolerated by participants [9,14,15].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Baker, S., Kelly, R. M., Waycott, J., Carrasco, R., Hoang, T., Batchelor, F., Ozanne, E., Dow, B., Warburton, J., & Vetere, F.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • National Ageing Research Institute (AU)
  • La Trobe University (AU)
Venue
Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction
Published
2019-11-07
Volume
3
Issue
CSCW
Pages
1-24
ISSN
2573-0142 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2988164270
Cited by
116
References
79
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 4
FWCI
19.85
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction (publishedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Minerva Access (University of Melbourne) (submittedVersion)
  • Griffith Research Online (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Australian Research Council (DP160101368)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Social Robot Interaction and HRI
Keywords
social virtual reality, older adults, embodied avatars, age stereotypes, social participation (health and rehabilitation), design considerations, head-mounted displays, motion tracking

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review