首页> 外文会议>ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems >Crowdsourcing vs Laboratory-Style Social Acceptability Studies? Examining the Social Acceptability of Spatial User Interactions for Head-Worn Displays
【24h】

Crowdsourcing vs Laboratory-Style Social Acceptability Studies? Examining the Social Acceptability of Spatial User Interactions for Head-Worn Displays

机译:众包与实验室风格的社会可接受性研究? 检查头部磨损显示器的空间用户交互的社会可接受性

获取原文

摘要

The use of crowdsourcing platforms for data collection in HCI research is attractive in their ability to provide rapid access to large and diverse participant samples. As a result, several researchers have conducted studies investigating the similarities and differences between data collected through crowdsourcing and more traditional, laboratory-style data collection. We add to this body of research by examining the feasibility of conducting social acceptability studies via crowdsourcing. Social acceptability can be a key determinant for the early adoption of emerging technologies, and as such, we focus our investigation on social acceptability for Head-Worn Display (HWD) input modalities. Our results indicate that data collected via a crowdsourced experiment and a laboratory-style setting did not differ at a statistically significant level. These results provide initial support for crowdsourcing platforms as viable options for conducting social acceptability research.
机译:在HCI研究中使用众包进行数据收集的平台,对其能够提供快速访问大型和不同的参与者样本的能力。 因此,若干研究人员进行了研究调查通过众包收集的数据与更传统的实验室样式数据收集之间的相似性和差异。 我们通过检查通过众包进行社会可接受性研究的可行性来增加该研究。 社会可接受性可以是早期采用新兴技术的关键决定因素,因此,我们将我们的重点放在头部磨损显示(HWD)输入方式的社会可接受性调查。 我们的结果表明,通过众群实验和实验室风格环境收集的数据在统计上显着下降并没有不同。 这些结果为众包平台提供了初步支持,作为进行社会可接受性研究的可行性选项。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号