Mixed Environment with Augmented Reality: The Effects of Presence in Game Interaction Situation

Augmented, virtual reality, online and offline are considered as a single living space of mixed reality - an important dimension of socialization of the personality functioning in such an environment enhanced and expanded by technical devices and programs. In this context one of the main psychological phenomena is the phenomenon of presence - individuals' subjective experience of being in mixed reality. The aim of the research is to study the peculiarities of the subjective experience (phenomenon) of presence by a personality, enhanced by augmented reality in a gaming social interaction in mixed environment. 154 students aged 17 to 24 participated in an augmented reality underwater hunting game in pairs. They were randomly presented with three instructions: neutral, cooperative, and competitive interaction. Subjective experience of presence (immersion in the game, engagement, realism of augmented reality) as an integrative indicator of technologically enhanced personality, social interaction (distraction to the partner, attitude towards the partner), positive and negative emotions were assessed. The following results were obtained: engagement and realism of augmented reality are related to immersion in the given environment. The effect of presence is related to positive, but not negative, changes in emotional state while playing in augmented reality. Game involvement is more pronounced in competitive AR conditions than in cooperative and neutral ones. Greater game involvement and realism of augmented reality are associated with fewer distractions to the partner. Regarding game immersion, the same effect was found for neutral instruction and cooperative instruction. The effect of presence (engagement and realism of augmented reality) in a mixed environment as an important indicator of personality, enhanced with augmented reality, was more pronounced in a competitive environment and was associated with more positive experiences in it and fewer distractions to a partner.

1. Averbuh N.V. Fenomen prisutstvija. Terminy i opredelenija [The phenomenon of presence. Terms and Definitions]. Informacionnoe obshhestvo: obrazovanie, nauka, kul'tura i tehnologii budushhego. Vypusk 6. Trudy XXV Mezhdunarodnoj ob#edinennoj nauchnoj konferencii «Internet i sovremennoe obshhestvo», Sankt-Peterburg, 23—24 ijunja 2022 g. [Informational society: education, science, culture and technology of the future. Issue 6. Proceedings of the XXV International Joint Scientific Conference "Internet and Modern Society"]. SPb.: ITMO University, 2022. Pp. 147—184. DOI:10.17586/ 2587-8557-2022-6-147-184 (In Russ.).
2. Velichkovskij B.B. Psihologicheskie faktory vozniknovenija chuvstva prisutstvija v virtual'nyh sredah [Psychological factors of the emerging sense of presence in virtual environments]. Nacional'nyj psihologicheskij zhurnal = National psychological journal, 2014. No. 3(15), pp. 31—38. DOI:10.11621/npj.2014.0304 (In Russ.).
3. Osin E.N. Izmerenie pozitivnyh i negativnyh jemocij: razrabotka russkojazychnogo analoga metodiki PANAS [Measuring Positive and Negative Emotions: Development of a Russian-language analogue of the PANAS method]. Zhurnal Vysshej Shkoly Jekonomiki = Psychology, Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2012. Vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 91—110. (In Russ.).
4. Poleva N.S. Psihologija smeshannoj real'nosti cifrovogo prostranstva [The psychology of digital space mixed reality]. In T.D. Marcinkovskoj, V.R. Orestovoj, O.V. Gavrichenko. (ed.). Cifrovoe obshhestvo v kul'turno-istoricheskoj paradigme: Kollektivnaja monografija [The Digital Society in the Cultural-Historical Paradigm: A Collective Monography]. Moscow: MPGU Publishing, 2019. 43—48. (In Russ.).
5. Soldatova G.V., Vojskunskij A.E. Social'no-kognitivnaja koncepcija cifrovoj socializacii: novaja jekosistema i social'naja jevoljucija psihiki [The Social-Cognitive Concept of Digital Socialization: The New Ecosystem and the Social Evolution of the Psyche]. Zhurnal Vysshej Shkoly Jekonomiki = Psychology, Journal of the Higher School of Economics, 2021. Vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 431—450. DOI:10.17323/1813-8918-2021-3-431-450 (In Russ.).
6. Chang R.-C., Chung L.-Y., Huang Y.-M. Developing an interactive augmented reality system as a complement to plant education and comparing its effectiveness with video learning. Interactive Learning Environments, Vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 1—20. DOI:10.1080/10494820.2014.982131
7. Chen J. Exploring Engagement in AR Games Through Content, Context, and Presence. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 2022. Vol. 664, pp. 2429—2432.
8. De Souza e Silva A., Sutko D. Theorizing Locative Technologies Through Philosophies of the Virtual. Communication Theory, 2011. Vol. 21, no. 1, 23—42. DOI:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2010.01374.x
9. Di Serio A., Ibáñez -B., Delgado-Kloos C. Impact of an augmented reality system on students' motivation for a visual art course. Computers & Education, 2013. Vol. 68, pp. 586—596. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.03.002
10. Enyedy N., Danish J., DeLiema D. Constructing liminal blends in a collaborative augmented-reality learning environment. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, Vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 7—34. DOI:10.1007/s11412-015-9207-1
11. Fisher E.J., González Y.S., Caridad Martínez Tena A.D. Bringing the Virtual to Reality - How Virtual Reality Can Enhance People’s Health and Social Lives. Neurology - Research & Surgery, 2019. Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1—10.
12. Flaviá C., Ibáñez-Sánchez S., Orús C. The impact of virtual, augmented and mixed reality technologies on the customer experience. Journal of Business Research, Vol. 100(C), pp. 547—560. DOI:10.1016/j.jbusres.2018.10.050
13. Georgiou Y., Kyza E. Investigating immersion in relation to students' learning during a collaborative location-based augmented reality activity. Proceedings of 12th International Conference of Computer Supported Collaborative Learning. Philadelphia, PA: International Society of the Learning Sciences, 2017. Vol. 1. pp. 423—430. DOI:10.22318/cscl2017.57
14. Heersmink R. Varieties of the extended self. Consciousness and Cognition, 2020. Vol. 85, Article 103001. DOI:10.1016/j.concog.2020.103001
15. Hein D., Mai C. The Usage of Presence Measurements in Research: A Review. Proceedings of the International Society for Presence Research 18th Annual Conference: Presence. Prague, 21-22 of may 2018. Prague: The International Society for Presence Research, 2018.
16. Hsu T.-C. Learning English with Augmented Reality: Do Learning Styles matter? Computers & Education, Vol. 106, pp. 137—149. DOI:10.1016/j.compedu.2016.12.007
17. Kourouthanassis P., Boletsis C., Bardaki C., Chasanidou D. Tourists responses to mobile augmented reality travel guides: The role of emotions on adoption behaviour. Pervasive and Mobile Computing, 2015. Vol. 18, 71—87. DOI:10.1016/j.pmcj.2014.08.009
18. Lombard M., Jones M.T. Defining Presence. In M. Lombard, F. Biocca, J. Freeman, W. IJsselsteijn, R. Schaevitz (Eds.). Immersed in Media: Telepresence Theory, Measurement & Technology. New York, NY: Springer, 2015. Pp. 13—34.
19. Maebell R., Lawrence A. Augmented Reality and Mixed Reality in Education. Easy chair preprint, DOI:10.13140/RG.2.2.11951.25769
20. Milgram P., Kishino A.F. Taxonomy of Mixed Reality Visual Displays. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, 1994. Vol. E77-D(12), pp. 1321—1329.
21. Pérez P., Gonzalez-Sosa E., Gutiérrez J., García N. Emerging Immersive Communication Systems: Overview, Taxonomy, and Good Practices for QoE Assessment. Frontiers In Signal Proceedings, Vol. 2, Article 917684. DOI:10.3389/frsip.2022.917684
22. Sadowski W. Jr., Stanney K. Chapter 45. Measuring and managing sense of presence. Handbook of Virtual Environments / In K.S. Hale, K.M. Stanney (Eds.). Design, Implementation, and Applications. CRC Press, 2002.
23. Short J., Williams E., Christie B. The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons, 195 p.
24. Skarbez R., Brooks F.P. Jr., Whitton M.C. A survey of presence and related concepts. ACM Computing Survey, Vol. 50, no. 6, Article 96, pp. 1—39. DOI:10.1145/3134301
25. Skarbez R., Smith M., Whitton M.C. Revisiting Milgram and Kishino’s Reality-Virtuality Continuum. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, Vol. 2. DOI:10.3389/frvir.2021.647997
26. Slater M. Place illusion and plausibility can lead to realistic behavior in immersive virtual environments. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 364, pp. 3549—3557.
27. Terkildsen T., Makransky G. Measuring presence in video games: An investigation of the potential use of physiological measures as indicators of presence. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, Vol. 126, pp. 64—80. DOI:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.02.006
28. Witmer B., Singer M. Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence, 1998. Vol. 7, pp. 225—240.