Browsing by Person "Hepperle, Daniel"

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Aspects of visual avatar appearance: self-representation, display type, and uncanny valley
(2021) Hepperle, Daniel; Purps, Christian Felix; Deuchler, Jonas; Wölfel, Matthias
The visual representation of human-like entities in virtual worlds is becoming a very important aspect as virtual reality becomes more and more “social”. The visual representation of a character’s resemblance to a real person and the emotional response to it, as well as the expectations raised, have been a topic of discussion for several decades and have been debated by scientists from different disciplines. But as with any new technology, the findings may need to be reevaluated and adapted to new modalities. In this context, we make two contributions which may have implications for how avatars should be represented in social virtual reality applications. First, we determine how default and customized characters of current social virtual reality platforms appear in terms of human likeness, eeriness, and likability, and whether there is a clear resemblance to a given person. It can be concluded that the investigated platforms vary strongly in their representation of avatars. Common to all is that a clear resemblance does not exist. Second, we show that the uncanny valley effect is also present in head-mounted displays, but - compared to 2D monitors - even more pronounced.
Exploring the potential of immersive virtual reality for social science research
(2025) Hepperle, Daniel; Vogelgesang, Jens
Immersive Virtual Reality (IVR) holds out the promise of laboratory‐grade experimental control while preserving much of the richness of real world experience, yet several issues remain unresolved. The central theme of this dissertation is spanned around the idea of using IVR as a tool to help researchers conducting empirical studies in the domain of social sciences. To address the question, the thesis incorporates five related studies. Paper 1 introduces the main areas of concern in a typical research process and offers guidance where IVR toolkits might be a valuable addition. Based on those identified areas of concern, the paper suggests solutions such as automation workflows in order to reduce the human‐error (i.e. using predefined scenes that already offer different basic standard methods in order to track all changes in the virtual world). Paper 2 examines seven open‐source IVR toolkits, demonstrating how to standardize modular scene setup, participant sensing, and data export. The analysis clarifies the features currently available in different toolkits and provides a basis for researchers to decide which features and toolkits offer the greatest benefits. We also discuss novel features such as AI‐based analysis which is not present in most toolkits. Based on this we provide guidance for future IVR‐based research software development. Paper 3 offers a PRISMA guided systematic scoping review of 56 publications, mapping the field of studies that compare either IVR with the real world or IVR with 2D screens. In short, the review finds that there are more similarities than differences between IVR and the real world. However, between IVR and 2D screens, more findings show differences between the two environments than similarities. Paper 4 provides an empirical test of transferability: the mere‐exposure effect was successfully replicated in the original study setup (n = 70 m; 49 f) as well as within IVR (n = 39 m; 24 f). Overall, the studies demonstrate the efficacy and practicality of employing IVR to induce effects analogous to those observed in a real‐world context in the case of the mere exposure effect. Finally, Paper 5 introduces asymmetric normalization, a novel manipulation that decouples self‐perception from how others see a participant in social IVR, thereby expanding the experimental design space with the possibility to reduce bias. This may concern various attributes such as size or age, as well as other visual or spatial characteristics. Pilot data from 40 participants shows that this technique reliably alters interpersonal‐distance preferences, opening a new design space for social science research. This dissertation advances research in the social sciences by showcasing the capabilities of IVR toolkits and illustrating how they can be integrated into established research processes. It further demonstrates that a cognitive‐affective mechanism (mere exposure) also is present in IVR. Moreover, it introduces asymmetric normalization as a novel manipulation technique that expands the experimental design space beyond what is feasible in physical laboratories. For research practice, the papers within the dissertation lower the barriers to entry for non‐technical scholars, provide a decision matrix for selecting and extending IVR toolkits. Together, they shift IVR from a technological novelty to a mature, shareable, and cost‐effective platform for conducting experiments in the social science domain.
Similarities and differences between immersive virtual reality, real world, and computer screens: A systematic scoping review in human behavior studies
(2023) Hepperle, Daniel; Wölfel, Matthias
In the broader field of human behavior studies, there are several trade-offs for on-site experiments. To be tied to a specific location can limit both the availability and diversity of participants. However, current and future technological advances make it possible to replicate real-world scenarios in a virtual environment up to a certain level of detail. How these differences add up and affect the cross-media validity of findings remains a topic of debate. How a virtual world is accessed, through a computer screen or a head-mounted display, may have a significant impact. Not surprisingly, the literature has presented various comparisons. However, while previous research has compared the different devices for a specific research question, a systematic review is lacking. To fill this gap, we conducted this review. We identified 1083 articles in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Following screening, 56 articles remained and were compared for a qualitative synthesis to provide the reader a summary of current research on the differences between head-mounted displays (HMDs), computer screens, and the real world. Overall, the data show that virtual worlds presented in an HMD are more similar to real-world situations than to computer screens. This supports the thesis that HMDs are more suitable than computer screens for conducting experiments in the field of human behavioral studies.