Ways to measure spatial presence: Review and future directions

Jari Laarni, Niklas Ravaja, Timo Saari, Saskia Böcking, Tilo Hartmann, Holger Schramm

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter or book articleProfessional

    15 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    The chapter focuses on the measurement of spatial presence. Our aim is review existing measures of spatial presence and provide evaluative classifications of the quality and appropriateness of these measurement methods. In addition to existing methods, we also shortly discuss the appropriateness of measures that have not been extensively used so far, such as "think aloud"-method, dual-task measures, eye-related measures and psychophysiological measures. We discuss the pros and cons of the different measures of spatial presence by using a range of indicators that are typically used to evaluate empirical methods. Both subjective and objective measures are evaluated in detail according to seven criteria, reliability, validity, sensitivity, applicability, diagnosticity, obtrusiveness and implementation requirements. A special emphasis is put on assessing whether a particular measurement method measures what it is aimed to measure (validity); to what degree it is able to discriminate different levels of effects (sensitivity); to what degree it provides information of the causes of differences (diagnosticity); and what its possible application domains are (applicability). Our central conclusion is that we need both objective and subjective indicators of spatial presence, and they should be combined in a single study in a way that makes sense for the specific research question. We also need more comprehensive and better-validated questionnaires that are theoretically derived and tap the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon. Also, objective indicators of spatial presence should be selected on the basis of the specific dimensions of presence being assessed.
    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationImmersed in Media
    Subtitle of host publicationTelepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology
    EditorsMatthew Lombard, Frank Biocca, Jonathan Freeman, Wijnand IJsselsteijn, Rachel J. Schaevitz
    PublisherSpringer
    Pages139-185
    Volume2
    ISBN (Electronic)978-3-319-10190-3
    ISBN (Print)978-3-319-10189-7
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2015
    MoE publication typeD2 Article in professional manuals or guides or professional information systems or text book material

    Fingerprint

    measurement method
    empirical method
    cause
    questionnaire

    Keywords

    • applicability
    • diagnosticity
    • implementation requirements
    • methods
    • obtrusiveness
    • reliability
    • sensitivity
    • special presence
    • validity

    Cite this

    Laarni, J., Ravaja, N., Saari, T., Böcking, S., Hartmann, T., & Schramm, H. (2015). Ways to measure spatial presence: Review and future directions. In M. Lombard, F. Biocca, J. Freeman, W. IJsselsteijn, & R. J. Schaevitz (Eds.), Immersed in Media: Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology (Vol. 2, pp. 139-185). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_8
    Laarni, Jari ; Ravaja, Niklas ; Saari, Timo ; Böcking, Saskia ; Hartmann, Tilo ; Schramm, Holger. / Ways to measure spatial presence : Review and future directions. Immersed in Media: Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology. editor / Matthew Lombard ; Frank Biocca ; Jonathan Freeman ; Wijnand IJsselsteijn ; Rachel J. Schaevitz. Vol. 2 Springer, 2015. pp. 139-185
    @inbook{87cce7fe47f8448282e27437c8868911,
    title = "Ways to measure spatial presence: Review and future directions",
    abstract = "The chapter focuses on the measurement of spatial presence. Our aim is review existing measures of spatial presence and provide evaluative classifications of the quality and appropriateness of these measurement methods. In addition to existing methods, we also shortly discuss the appropriateness of measures that have not been extensively used so far, such as {"}think aloud{"}-method, dual-task measures, eye-related measures and psychophysiological measures. We discuss the pros and cons of the different measures of spatial presence by using a range of indicators that are typically used to evaluate empirical methods. Both subjective and objective measures are evaluated in detail according to seven criteria, reliability, validity, sensitivity, applicability, diagnosticity, obtrusiveness and implementation requirements. A special emphasis is put on assessing whether a particular measurement method measures what it is aimed to measure (validity); to what degree it is able to discriminate different levels of effects (sensitivity); to what degree it provides information of the causes of differences (diagnosticity); and what its possible application domains are (applicability). Our central conclusion is that we need both objective and subjective indicators of spatial presence, and they should be combined in a single study in a way that makes sense for the specific research question. We also need more comprehensive and better-validated questionnaires that are theoretically derived and tap the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon. Also, objective indicators of spatial presence should be selected on the basis of the specific dimensions of presence being assessed.",
    keywords = "applicability, diagnosticity, implementation requirements, methods, obtrusiveness, reliability, sensitivity, special presence, validity",
    author = "Jari Laarni and Niklas Ravaja and Timo Saari and Saskia B{\"o}cking and Tilo Hartmann and Holger Schramm",
    year = "2015",
    doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_8",
    language = "English",
    isbn = "978-3-319-10189-7",
    volume = "2",
    pages = "139--185",
    editor = "Matthew Lombard and Frank Biocca and Jonathan Freeman and { IJsselsteijn}, Wijnand and Schaevitz, {Rachel J.}",
    booktitle = "Immersed in Media",
    publisher = "Springer",
    address = "Germany",

    }

    Laarni, J, Ravaja, N, Saari, T, Böcking, S, Hartmann, T & Schramm, H 2015, Ways to measure spatial presence: Review and future directions. in M Lombard, F Biocca, J Freeman, W IJsselsteijn & RJ Schaevitz (eds), Immersed in Media: Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology. vol. 2, Springer, pp. 139-185. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_8

    Ways to measure spatial presence : Review and future directions. / Laarni, Jari; Ravaja, Niklas; Saari, Timo; Böcking, Saskia; Hartmann, Tilo; Schramm, Holger.

    Immersed in Media: Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology. ed. / Matthew Lombard; Frank Biocca; Jonathan Freeman; Wijnand IJsselsteijn; Rachel J. Schaevitz. Vol. 2 Springer, 2015. p. 139-185.

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter or book articleProfessional

    TY - CHAP

    T1 - Ways to measure spatial presence

    T2 - Review and future directions

    AU - Laarni, Jari

    AU - Ravaja, Niklas

    AU - Saari, Timo

    AU - Böcking, Saskia

    AU - Hartmann, Tilo

    AU - Schramm, Holger

    PY - 2015

    Y1 - 2015

    N2 - The chapter focuses on the measurement of spatial presence. Our aim is review existing measures of spatial presence and provide evaluative classifications of the quality and appropriateness of these measurement methods. In addition to existing methods, we also shortly discuss the appropriateness of measures that have not been extensively used so far, such as "think aloud"-method, dual-task measures, eye-related measures and psychophysiological measures. We discuss the pros and cons of the different measures of spatial presence by using a range of indicators that are typically used to evaluate empirical methods. Both subjective and objective measures are evaluated in detail according to seven criteria, reliability, validity, sensitivity, applicability, diagnosticity, obtrusiveness and implementation requirements. A special emphasis is put on assessing whether a particular measurement method measures what it is aimed to measure (validity); to what degree it is able to discriminate different levels of effects (sensitivity); to what degree it provides information of the causes of differences (diagnosticity); and what its possible application domains are (applicability). Our central conclusion is that we need both objective and subjective indicators of spatial presence, and they should be combined in a single study in a way that makes sense for the specific research question. We also need more comprehensive and better-validated questionnaires that are theoretically derived and tap the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon. Also, objective indicators of spatial presence should be selected on the basis of the specific dimensions of presence being assessed.

    AB - The chapter focuses on the measurement of spatial presence. Our aim is review existing measures of spatial presence and provide evaluative classifications of the quality and appropriateness of these measurement methods. In addition to existing methods, we also shortly discuss the appropriateness of measures that have not been extensively used so far, such as "think aloud"-method, dual-task measures, eye-related measures and psychophysiological measures. We discuss the pros and cons of the different measures of spatial presence by using a range of indicators that are typically used to evaluate empirical methods. Both subjective and objective measures are evaluated in detail according to seven criteria, reliability, validity, sensitivity, applicability, diagnosticity, obtrusiveness and implementation requirements. A special emphasis is put on assessing whether a particular measurement method measures what it is aimed to measure (validity); to what degree it is able to discriminate different levels of effects (sensitivity); to what degree it provides information of the causes of differences (diagnosticity); and what its possible application domains are (applicability). Our central conclusion is that we need both objective and subjective indicators of spatial presence, and they should be combined in a single study in a way that makes sense for the specific research question. We also need more comprehensive and better-validated questionnaires that are theoretically derived and tap the multidimensional nature of the phenomenon. Also, objective indicators of spatial presence should be selected on the basis of the specific dimensions of presence being assessed.

    KW - applicability

    KW - diagnosticity

    KW - implementation requirements

    KW - methods

    KW - obtrusiveness

    KW - reliability

    KW - sensitivity

    KW - special presence

    KW - validity

    U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_8

    DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_8

    M3 - Chapter or book article

    SN - 978-3-319-10189-7

    VL - 2

    SP - 139

    EP - 185

    BT - Immersed in Media

    A2 - Lombard, Matthew

    A2 - Biocca, Frank

    A2 - Freeman, Jonathan

    A2 - IJsselsteijn, Wijnand

    A2 - Schaevitz, Rachel J.

    PB - Springer

    ER -

    Laarni J, Ravaja N, Saari T, Böcking S, Hartmann T, Schramm H. Ways to measure spatial presence: Review and future directions. In Lombard M, Biocca F, Freeman J, IJsselsteijn W, Schaevitz RJ, editors, Immersed in Media: Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology. Vol. 2. Springer. 2015. p. 139-185 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10190-3_8