Search

Creating accessible Virtual Reality (VR) is an ongoing concern in the Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) research community. However, there is little reflection on how accessibility should be conceptualized in the context of an experiential technology. We address this gap in our work: We first explore how accessibility is currently defined, highlighting a growing recognition of the importance of equitable and enriching experiences. We then carry out a literature study (N=28) to examine how accessibility and its relationship with experience is currently conceptualized in VR research. Our results show that existing work seldom defines accessibility in the context of VR, and that barrier-centric research is prevalent. Likewise, we show that experience - e.g., that of presence or immersion - is rarely designed for or evaluated, while participant feedback suggests that it is relevant for disabled users of VR. On this basis, we contribute a working definition of VR accessibility that considers experience a necessary condition for equitable access, and discuss the need for future work to focus on experience in the same way as VR research addressing non-disabled persons does.

Disabled people experience many barriers in daily life, but non-disabled people rarely pause to reflect and engage in joint action to advocate for access. In this demo, we explore the potential of Virtual Reality (VR) to sensitize non-disabled people to barriers in the built environment. We contribute a VR simulation of a major traffic hub in Karlsruhe, Germany, and we employ visual embellishments and animations to showcase barriers and potential removal strategies. Through our work, we seek to engage users in conversation on what kind of environment is accessible to whom, and what equitable participation in society requires. Additionally, we aim to expand the understanding of how VR technology can promote reflection through interactive exploration., Comment: Accepted at Mensch und Computer 2024 conference

Repeated measurements of player experience are crucial in games user research, assessing how different designs evolve over time. However, this necessitates lightweight measurement instruments that are fit for the purpose. In this study, we conduct an examination of the test-retest reliability of the \emph{miniPXI} -- a short variant of the \emph{Player Experience Inventory} (\emph{PXI}), an established measure for measuring player experience. We analyzed test-retest reliability by leveraging four games involving 100 participants, comparing it with four established multi-item measures and single-item indicators such as the Net Promoter Score (\emph{NPS}) and overall enjoyment. The findings show mixed outcomes; the \emph{miniPXI} demonstrated varying levels of test-retest reliability. Some constructs showed good to moderate reliability, while others were less consistent. On the other hand, multi-item measures exhibited moderate to good test-retest reliability, demonstrating their effectiveness in measuring player experiences over time. Additionally, the employed single-item indicators (\emph{NPS} and overall enjoyment) demonstrated good reliability. The results of our study highlight the complexity of player experience evaluations over time, utilizing single and multiple items per construct measures. We conclude that single-item measures may not be appropriate for long-term investigations of more complex PX dimensions and provide practical considerations for the applicability of such measures in repeated measurements.

The games research community has developed substantial knowledge on designing engaging experiences that draw players in. Surprisingly, less is known about player \textit{dis}engagement, with existing work predominantly addressing disengagement from the perspective of problematic play, and research exploring player disengagement from a constructive designer perspective is lacking. In this paper, we address this gap and argue that disengagement from games should be constructively designed, allowing players to exit play sessions in a self-determined way. Following a two-phase research approach that combines an interview study (n=16) with a follow-up online survey (n=111), we systematically analyze player perspectives on exiting play sessions. Our work expands the existing notion of disengagement through a characterization of exit experiences, a lens on disengagement as a process, and points for reflection for the design of games that seek to address player disengagement in a constructive way.

Games research and industry have developed a solid understanding of how to design engaging, playful experiences that draws players in for hours and causes them to lose their sense of time. While these designs can provide enjoyable experiences, many individuals -- especially children -- may find it challenging to regulate their playing time, and often they struggle to turn off the game. In turn, this affords external regulation of children's playing behavior by limiting playing time or encouraging alternative activities, which frequently leads to conflicts between parents and the children. Here, we see an opportunity for game design to address player disengagement through design, facilitating a timely and autonomous exit from play. Hence, while most research and practitioners design for maximizing player engagement, we argue for a perspective shift towards disengagement as a design tool that allows for unobtrusive and smooth exits from the game. We advocate that interweaving disengagement into the game design could reduce friction within families, allowing children to finish game sessions more easily, facilitate a sense of autonomy, and support an overall healthier relationship with games. In this position paper, we outline a research agenda that examines how game design can address player disengagement, what challenges exist in the specific context of games for children, and how such approaches can be reconciled with the experiential, artistic, and commercial goals of games.