Sphere Window: Challenges and Opportunities of 360° Video in Collaborative Design Workshops.
Authors: 
Wo Meijer, 
Jacky Bourgeois, Wilhelm Frederik van der Vegte, Gerd KortuemAuthors Info & Claims
Article No.: 71, Pages 1 - 13
Abstract
The increased ubiquity of 360° video presents a unique opportunity for designers to deeply engage with the world of users by capturing the complete visual context. However, the opportunities and challenges 360° video introduces for video design ethnography are unclear. This study investigates this gap through 16 workshops in which experienced designers engaged with 360° video. Our analysis shows that while 360° video enhances designers’ ability to explore and understand user contexts, it also complicates the process of sharing insights. To address this challenge, we present two opportunities to support the use of 360° video by designers - the creation of designerly 360° video annotation tools, and 360° “screenshots” - in order to enable designers to leverage the complete context of 360° video for user research.
References
[1]
Tanja Aitamurto, Andrea Stevenson Won, Sukolsak Sakshuwong, Byungdoo Kim, Yasamin Sadeghi, Krysten Stein, Peter G Royal, and Catherine Lynn Kircos. 2021. From FOMO to JOMO: Examining the Fear and Joy of Missing Out and Presence in a 360° Video Viewing Experience. In Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Yokohama Japan, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445183
[2]
EunSeo Bang and Caglar Yildirim. 2018. Virtually Empathetic?: Examining the Effects of Virtual Reality Storytelling on Empathy. In Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality: Interaction, Navigation, Visualization, Embodiment, and Simulation, Jessie Y.C. Chen and Gino Fragomeni (Eds.). Vol. 10909. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 290–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-91581-4_21 Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
[3]
Miguel Barreda-Ángeles, Sara Aleix-Guillaume, and Alexandre Pereda-Baños. 2020. An “Empathy Machine” or a “Just-for-the-Fun-of-It” Machine? Effects of Immersion in Nonfiction 360-Video Stories on Empathy and Enjoyment. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking 23, 10 (Oct. 2020), 683–688. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0665
[4]
Cynthia L. Bennett and Daniela K. Rosner. 2019. The Promise of Empathy: Design, Disability, and Knowing the "Other". In Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Glasgow Scotland Uk, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300528
[5]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2006. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology 3, 2 (Jan. 2006), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
[6]
Virginia Braun and Victoria Clarke. 2022. Thematic analysis: a practical guide. SAGE, London ; Thousand Oaks, California. OCLC: on1247204005.
[7]
Marc Van den Broeck, Fahim Kawsar, and Johannes Schöning. 2017. It’s All Around You: Exploring 360° Video Viewing Experiences on Mobile Devices. In Proceedings of the 25th ACM international conference on Multimedia(MM ’17). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 762–768. https://doi.org/10.1145/3123266.3123347
[8]
Jacob Buur, Thomas Binder, and Eva Brandt. 2000. Taking Video Beyond ’Hard Data’ in User Centered Design. In In Proceedings of Participatory Design Conference. 21–29.
[9]
Jacob Buur and Astrid Soendergaard. 2000. Video card game: an augmented environment for user centred design discussions. In Proceedings of DARE 2000 on Designing augmented reality environments(DARE ’00). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 63–69. https://doi.org/10.1145/354666.354673
[10]
Nigel Cross. 1982. Designerly ways of knowing. Design Studies 3, 4 (Oct. 1982), 221–227. https://doi.org/10.1016/0142-694X(82)90040-0
[11]
Claudia Eckert and Martin Stacey. 2000. Sources of inspiration: a language of design. Design Studies 21, 5 (Sept. 2000), 523–538. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0142-694X(00)00022-3
[12]
Bradley Garrett and Harriet Hawkins. 2014. Creative Video Ethnographies: Video Methodologies of Urban Exploration. In Video methods. Routledge, 142–164.
[13]
Milene Guerreiro Gonçalves, Carlos Cardoso, and Petra Badke-Schaub. 2011. AROUND YOU: HOW DESIGNERS GET INSPIRED. DS 68-7: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 11), Impacting Society through Engineering Design, Vol. 7: Human Behaviour in Design, Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark, 15.-19.08.2011 (2011), 404–413. https://www.designsociety.org/publication/30695/AROUND+YOU%3A+HOW+DESIGNERS+GET+INSPIRED
[14]
Rorik Henrikson, Bruno Araujo, Fanny Chevalier, Karan Singh, and Ravin Balakrishnan. 2016. Multi-Device Storyboards for Cinematic Narratives in VR. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, Tokyo Japan, 787–796. https://doi.org/10.1145/2984511.2984539
[15]
Ann Heylighen and Andy Dong. 2019. To empathise or not to empathise? Empathy and its limits in design. Design Studies 65 (Nov. 2019), 107–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2019.10.007
[16]
hitlabnz. 2020. How to watch a 360-degree video. https://www.hitlabnz.org/index.php/how-to-watch-a-360-degree-video/
[17]
Yili Jin, Junhua Liu, Fangxin Wang, and Shuguang Cui. 2022. Where Are You Looking?: A Large-Scale Dataset of Head and Gaze Behavior for 360-Degree Videos and a Pilot Study. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM International Conference on Multimedia. ACM, Lisboa Portugal, 1025–1034. https://doi.org/10.1145/3503161.3548200
[18]
Tero Jokela, Jarno Ojala, and Kaisa Väänänen. 2019. How people use 360-degree cameras. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia. ACM, Pisa Italy, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1145/3365610.3365645
[19]
Panos Kostakos, Paula Alavesa, Jonas Oppenlaender, and Simo Hosio. 2019. VR ethnography: a pilot study on the use of virtual reality ’go-along’ interviews in Google street view. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Mobile and Ubiquitous Multimedia(MUM ’19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1145/3365610.3368422
[20]
Merlijn Kouprie and Froukje Sleeswijk Visser. 2009. A framework for empathy in design: stepping into and out of the user’s life. Journal of Engineering Design 20, 5 (Oct. 2009), 437–448. https://doi.org/10.1080/09544820902875033
[21]
Mark A. M. Kramer. 2022. Innovating Methods: Observing In Situ Technology Experiences Using Novel Visual Research Methods. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 38, 3 (Feb. 2022), 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1938388 Publisher: Taylor & Francis _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1938388.
[22]
Andrew LaBonte, Jon Hindmarsh, and Dirk vom Lehn. 2021. Data collection at height: Embodied competence, multisensoriality and video-based research in an extreme context of work. Social Interaction. Video-Based Studies of Human Sociality 4, 3 (Aug. 2021). https://doi.org/10.7146/si.v4i3.128155 Number: 3.
[23]
George Liu, Sukanya Krishnamurthy, and Pieter van Wesemael. 2021. Conceptualizing cycling experience in urban design research: a systematic literature review. Applied Mobilities 6, 1 (Jan. 2021), 92–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2018.1494347 Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2018.1494347.
[24]
Anne Lusk. 2012. A HISTORY OF BICYCLE ENVIRONMENTS IN CHINA: COMPARISONS WITH THE US AND THE NETHERLANDS.Harvard Asia Quarterly 14, 4 (2012).
[25]
Afshin Taghavi Nasrabadi, Aliehsan Samiei, Anahita Mahzari, Ryan P. McMahan, Ravi Prakash, Mylène C. Q. Farias, and Marcelo M. Carvalho. 2019. A taxonomy and dataset for 360° videos. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Multimedia Systems Conference. ACM, Amherst Massachusetts, 273–278. https://doi.org/10.1145/3304109.3325812
[26]
Luís A. R. Neng and Teresa Chambel. 2010. Get around 360° hypervideo. In Proceedings of the 14th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Envisioning Future Media Environments. ACM, Tampere Finland, 119–122. https://doi.org/10.1145/1930488.1930512
[27]
Daniel Neubauer, Verena Paepcke-Hjeltness, Pete Evans, Betsy Barnhart, and Tor Finseth. 2017. Experiencing Technology Enabled Empathy Mapping. The Design Journal 20, sup1 (July 2017), S4683–S4689. https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352966 Publisher: Routledge _eprint: https://doi.org/10.1080/14606925.2017.1352966.
[28]
Cuong Nguyen, Stephen DiVerdi, Aaron Hertzmann, and Feng Liu. 2017. CollaVR: Collaborative In-Headset Review for VR Video. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, Québec City QC Canada, 267–277. https://doi.org/10.1145/3126594.3126659
[29]
Sara Nielsen, Mikael B. Skov, Karl Damkjær Hansen, and Aleksandra Kaszowska. 2023. Using User-Generated YouTube Videos to Understand Unguided Interactions with Robots in Public Places. ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 12, 1 (Feb. 2023), 5:1–5:40. https://doi.org/10.1145/3550280
[30]
Nicolas Nova. 2014. Beyond design ethnography. SHS Publishing.
[31]
Daniel Pimentel, Sri Kalyanaraman, Yu-Hao Lee, and Shiva Halan. 2021. Voices of the unsung: The role of social presence and interactivity in building empathy in 360 video. New Media & Society 23, 8 (Aug. 2021), 2230–2254. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444821993124 Publisher: SAGE Publications.
[32]
Martin Porcheron, Leigh Clark, Stuart Alan Nicholson, and Matt Jones. 2023. Cyclists’ Use of Technology While on Their Bike. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Hamburg Germany, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3580971
[33]
Emma Rose and Alison Cardinal. 2018. Participatory video methods in UX: sharing power with users to gain insights into everyday life. Communication Design Quarterly 6, 2 (Oct. 2018), 9–20. https://doi.org/10.1145/3282665.3282667
[34]
Silvia Rossi, Cagri Ozcinar, Aljosa Smolic, and Laura Toni. 2020. Do Users Behave Similarly in VR? Investigation of the User Influence on the System Design. ACM Transactions on Multimedia Computing, Communications, and Applications 16, 2 (May 2020), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3381846
[35]
Elizabeth Sanders and Pieter Jan Stappers. 2012. Convivial design toolbox: generative research for the front end of design. BIS, Amsterdam.
[36]
Taufik Akbar Sitompul and Markus Wallmyr. 2019. Analyzing Online Videos: A Complement to Field Studies in Remote Locations. In Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2019, David Lamas, Fernando Loizides, Lennart Nacke, Helen Petrie, Marco Winckler, and Panayiotis Zaphiris (Eds.). Vol. 11748. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 371–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-29387-1_21 Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
[37]
Antti Surma-aho and Katja Hölttä-Otto. 2022. Conceptualization and operationalization of empathy in design research. Design Studies 78 (Jan. 2022), 101075. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2021.101075
[38]
Balasaravanan Thoravi Kumaravel, Cuong Nguyen, Stephen DiVerdi, and Bjoern Hartmann. 2020. TransceiVR: Bridging Asymmetrical Communication Between VR Users and External Collaborators. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, Virtual Event USA, 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1145/3379337.3415827
[39]
Naoya Tojo, Tomoko Oto, and Sumaru Niida. 2021. How Ethnographic Practices Are Reconfigured with 360-degree Cameras. SciTePress. https://doi.org/10.5220/0010639000003060
[40]
Shingo Uchihashi, Jonathan Foote, Andreas Girgensohn, and John Boreczky. 1999. Video Manga: generating semantically meaningful video summaries. In Proceedings of the seventh ACM international conference on Multimedia (Part 1). ACM, Orlando Florida USA, 383–392. https://doi.org/10.1145/319463.319654
[41]
Anna Vatanen, Heidi Spets, Maarit Siromaa, Mirka Rauniomaa, and Tiina Keisanen. 2022. Experiences in Collecting 360° Video Data and Collaborating Remotely in Virtual Reality. QuiViRR: Qualitative Video Research Reports 3 (Sept. 2022), a0005–a0005. https://doi.org/10.54337/ojs.quivirr.v3.2022.a0005
[42]
Salu Pekka Ylirisku and Jacob Buur. 2007. Designing with Video: Focusing the user-centred design process. Springer Science & Business Media. https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-1-84628-961-3
[43]
Goranka Zoric, Louise Barkhuus, Arvid Engström, and Elin Önnevall. 2013. Panoramic video: design challenges and implications for content interaction. In Proceedings of the 11th European Conference on Interactive TV and Video. ACM, Como Italy, 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1145/2465958.2465959
Index Terms
- Sphere Window: Challenges and Opportunities of 360° Video in Collaborative Design Workshops.
Recommendations
Design Challenges and Opportunities of Fossil Preparation Tools and Methods
KUI '23: Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Culture and Computer Science: Code and MaterialityFossil preparation is the activity of processing paleontological specimens for research and exhibition. Alongside traditional mechanical extraction methods, fossil preparation presently comprises non-destructive digital techniques within the emerging ...
Challenges, opportunities and future perspectives in including children with disabilities in the design of interactive technology
IDC '12: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and ChildrenIn this paper we discuss participatory approaches to designing interactive technologies for children with disabilities. While participatory design (PD) has been increasingly influential in the field of Human-Computer Interaction as a whole, applying its ...
Participatory Design Going Digital: Challenges and Opportunities for Distributed Place-Making
AbstractCOVID-19 has urged researchers to explore new options for distributed participatory design, as physical meetings and workshops became unfeasible. This situation posed new challenges but also opportunities, in particular with respect to engagement ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
October 2024
1236 pages
ISBN:9798400709661
DOI:10.1145/3679318
Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 13 October 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
- Sociale en Geesteswetenschappen, NWO
Conference
NordiCHI 2024
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 379 of 1,572 submissions, 24%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 49Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)49
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)31
Reflects downloads up to 11 Dec 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in