ArticleCyberpsychology, behavior and social networking2023
User Experience Evaluation in Shared Interactive Virtual Reality.
Article in Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Virtual reality enhanced mindfulness and yoga intervention for postpartum depression and anxiety in the post COVID era.Scientific reports · 2025Trial
- Face acupoint recognition and localization based on geometric topological relationships.Journal of traditional Chinese medicine = Chung i tsa chih ying wen pan · 2026Article
- Effects of game interactivity on perceived emotional challenge, mixed-affect emotional experiences and physiological responses.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- How digital twin technology revitalizes exhibits and enhances visitors' appreciation for ceramic collections in online museum tours.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Experiences and perceptions of palliative care patients receiving virtual reality therapy: a meta-synthesis of qualitative studies.BMC palliative care · 2024Article
- Assessing the Relationship Between Digital Trail Making Test Performance and IT Task Performance: Empirical Study.JMIR human factors · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Virtual reality (VR) has served the entertainment industry all the way to world-leading museums in delivering engaging experiences through multisensory virtual environments (VEs). Today, the rise of the Metaverse fuels a growing interest in leveraging this technology, bringing along an emerging need to better understand the way different dimensions of VEs, namely social and interactive, impact overall user experience (UX). This between-subject exploratory field study investigates differences in the perceived and lived experience of 28 participants engaging, either individually or in dyads, in a VR experience comprising different levels of interactivity, i.e., passive or active. A mixed methods approach combining conventional UX measures, i.e., psychometric surveys and user interviews, as well as psychophysiological measures, i.e., wearable bio- and motion sensors, allowed for a comprehensive assessment of users' immersive and affective experiences. Results pertaining to the social dimension of the experience reveal that shared VR elicits significantly more positive affect, whereas presence, immersion, flow, and state anxiety are unaffected by the copresence of a real-world partner. Results pertaining to the interactive dimension of the experience suggest that the interactivity afforded by the VE moderates the effect of copresence on users' adaptive immersion and arousal. These results support that VR can be shared with a real-world partner not only without hindering the immersive experience, but also by enhancing positive affect. Hence, in addition to offering methodological directions for future VR field research, this study provides interesting practical insights into guiding VR developers toward optimal multiuser virtual environments.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.