Hostname: page-component-54dcc4c588-b5cpw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-11T04:51:17.408Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Co-design in virtual environments with 3D scanned childcare rooms in social virtual reality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 May 2024

Yuki Taoka ,
Momoko Nakatani ,
Takumi Sato ,
Kaho Kagohashi ,
Fuyumi Iwasawa ,
Shouichi Hasegawa ,
Shigeru Owada  and
Shigeki Saito
Yuki Taoka*
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Momoko Nakatani
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Takumi Sato
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Kaho Kagohashi
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Fuyumi Iwasawa
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Shouichi Hasegawa
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Shigeru Owada
Affiliation:
Sony Computer Science Laboratories, Inc., Japan
Shigeki Saito
Affiliation:
Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
*
taoka.y.aa@m.titech.ac.jp

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This research proposes a virtual environment (VE) for co-designing in early childhood education and care settings using a social VR platform with 3D-scanned childcare rooms. Co-design workshops were analyzed focusing on perceived presence and experience and workshop outcomes. The results indicate a high level of presence in the VE, with unique advantages like facilitating 3D prototyping. However, challenges such as unbalanced prototyping tools distribution were also noted. The study highlights the potential of VEs with 3D scanned rooms in co-design.

Keywords

co-designvirtual reality (VR)digital twinvirtual prototypingdesign methods

Information

Type
Human Behaviour and Design Creativity
Information
Proceedings of the Design Society , Volume 4: DESIGN 2024 , May 2024 , pp. 1115 - 1124
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - ND
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is unaltered and is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained for commercial re-use or in order to create a derivative work.
Copyright
The Author(s), 2024.

References

Bertoni, A (2020) DATA-DRIVEN DESIGN IN CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES. Proceedings of the Design Society: DESIGN Conference 1. Cambridge University Press: 101–110.Google Scholar
Détienne, F, Baker, M, Vanhille, M, et al. (2016) Cultures of collaboration in engineering design education: a contrastive case study in France and Japan. International Journal of Design Creativity and Innovation 5(1–2): 104–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorta, T, Kinayoglu, G and Hoffmann, M (2016) Hyve-3D and the 3D Cursor: Architectural co-design with freedom in Virtual Reality. International Journal of Architectural Computing 14(2). SAGE Publications: 87–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorta, T, Safin, S, Boudhraâ, S, et al. (2019) Co-Designing in Social VR. Intelligent and Informed--CAADRIA, Wellington 2. papers.cumincad.org: 141–150.Google Scholar
Freeman, G, Zamanifard, S, Maloney, D, et al. (2020) My Body, My Avatar: How People Perceive Their Avatars in Social Virtual Reality. In: Extended Abstracts of the 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA, 25 April 2020, pp. 1–8. CHI EA ’20. Association for Computing Machinery.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, G, Acena, D, McNeese, NJ, et al. (2022) Working Together Apart through Embodiment: Engaging in Everyday Collaborative Activities in Social Virtual Reality. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6(GROUP). 17. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery: 1–25.Google Scholar
Georgiev, GV, Nanjappan, V, Georgieva, I, et al. (2023) Empathic Experiences of Visual Conditions with Virtual Reality. In: Interactive Storytelling, 2023, pp. 168–180. Springer Nature Switzerland.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grieves, M and Vickers, J (2017) Digital Twin: Mitigating Unpredictable, Undesirable Emergent Behavior in Complex Systems. In: Kahlen, F-J, Flumerfelt, S, and Alves, A (eds.) Transdisciplinary Perspectives on Complex Systems: New Findings and Approaches. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 85–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guegan, J, Buisine, S, Mantelet, F, et al. (2016) Avatar-mediated creativity: When embodying inventors makes engineers more creative. Computers in human behavior 61: 165–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, JA, Horgan, TG and Murphy, NA (2019) Nonverbal Communication. Annual review of psychology 70: 271–294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hwang, AH-C, Kim, J, Lobo, SN, et al. (2022) Being there to Learn: Narrative Style and Cross-platform Comparison for 360-degree Educational Videos. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 6(CSCW2). 278. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery: 1–28.Google Scholar
Koutsabasis, P, Vosinakis, S, Malisova, K, et al. (2012) On the value of Virtual Worlds for collaborative design. Design Studies 33(4): 357–390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kritzinger, W, Karner, M, Traar, G, et al. (2018) Digital Twin in manufacturing: A categorical literature review and classification. IFAC-PapersOnLine 51(11): 1016–1022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyu, Z, Yang J (junrui), Lam MS, et al. (2022) HomeView: Automatically Building Smart Home Digital Twins With Augmented Reality Headsets. In: Adjunct Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, New York, NY, USA, 28 October 2022, pp. 1–6. UIST ’22 Adjunct 23 Article 23. Association for Computing Machinery.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maloney, D, Freeman, G and Wohn, DY (2020) “Talking without a Voice”: Understanding Non-verbal Communication in Social Virtual Reality. Proc. ACM Hum.-Comput. Interact. 4(CSCW2). 175. New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maurya, S, Arai, K, Moriya, K, et al. (2019) A mixed reality tool for end-users participation in early creative design tasks. International journal of oncology. Springer. forthcoming 2019.Google Scholar
Mei, Y, Li, J, de Ridder, H, et al. (2021) CakeVR: A Social Virtual Reality (VR) Tool for Co-designing Cakes. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA, 7 May 2021, pp. 1–14. CHI ’21 572 Article 572. Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
Nem, VG and Bredikhina, L (2023) Social VR Lifestyle Survey 2023. Available at: https://medium.com/@nemchan_nel/social-vr-lifestyle-survey-2023-a61d1c4cae33 (accessed 14 November 2023).Google Scholar
Oecd (2015) Starting Strong IV.Google Scholar
Regenbrecht, H and Schubert, T (2002) Real and illusory interactions enhance presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 11(4). Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press: 425–434.Google Scholar
Roquet, P (2023) Japan's Retreat to the Metaverse. forthcoming 2023.Google Scholar
Sanders, EBN and Stappers, PJ (2012) Convivial toolbox: Generative research for the front end of design. research.tudelft.nl. forthcoming 2012.Google Scholar
Steen, M (2013) Co-design as a process of joint inquiry and imagination. Design issues 29(2). MIT Press - Journals: 16–28.Google Scholar