From One World to Another: Interfaces for Efficiently Transitioning Between Virtual Environments

TL;DR

This study addresses efficient VR world switching by proposing an interaction model and eight interfaces that pair two preview patterns (World-in-Miniature and Portal) with four interaction techniques (Hand Palette, Head Palette, World Wheel, Gallery). A within-subjects user study (N=22) across six virtual environments shows WiMs enable rapid spatial awareness while portals support fast pre-orientation; Hand Palette and World Wheel offer strong usability and efficiency, with different trade-offs for comfort and continuity. The authors provide design recommendations, discuss task-dependence of preview choices, and release open-source implementations to guide future VR multitasking interfaces. The work advances practical VR multitasking by delivering a unified workflow for activation, preview, selection, and transition, potentially enabling smoother OS-level world switching in VR ecosystems.

Abstract

Personal computers and handheld devices provide keyboard shortcuts and swipe gestures to enable users to efficiently switch between applications, whereas today's virtual reality (VR) systems do not. In this work, we present an exploratory study on user interface aspects to support efficient switching between worlds in VR. We created eight interfaces that afford previewing and selecting from the available virtual worlds, including methods using portals and worlds-in-miniature (WiMs). To evaluate these methods, we conducted a controlled within-subjects empirical experiment (N=22) where participants frequently transitioned between six different environments to complete an object collection task. Our quantitative and qualitative results show that WiMs supported rapid acquisition of high-level spatial information while searching and were deemed most efficient by participants while portals provided fast pre-orientation. Finally, we present insights into the applicability, usability, and effectiveness of the VR world switching methods we explored, and provide recommendations for their application and future context/world switching techniques and interfaces.

Figures (11)

• Figure 1: Interaction model for switching worlds. The user begins in Virtual World B (highlighted in magenta) and initiates the switching process. World switching proceeds through an interaction sequence with three steps: (1) Activation of the switching interface, (2) Selection of a target world from the available options, and (3) Confirmation of that choice. During these steps, the system may provide preview content to help the user evaluate the destination. Once confirmed, the user begins the (4) Transition to the selected target world (e.g., Virtual World D). This model distinguishes user-driven interaction steps from system-provided previews and transitions.
• Figure 2: Eight virtual world switching interfaces evaluated in our study. Two preview patterns are used: (1) Portal and (2) World-in-Miniature (WiM). Four interaction techniques were derived: (a) Gallery, (b) Head Palette, (c) Hand Palette, and (d) World Wheel. The selected environment is indicated by a yellow arrow---(a) and (d)---or a blue spherical cursor---(b) and (c). The latter is highlighted with a yellow circle for clarity.
• Figure 3: Virtual environments (VEs) used in our experiment. (a-e) VEs where coins could appear, (f) Starting location (Home environment) where participants deposited coins and received interface training before the start of each trial block for a technique through a UI containing text instructions and a video demonstration.
• Figure 4: Search time performance across all VR world-switching interfaces. Letter-value (boxen) plots summarize distributions for search times. Lower values indicate better performance. Asterisks denote significant pairwise differences (* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001).
• Figure 5: Letter-value (boxen) plots of retrieve times by preview pattern (left) and deposit times by interaction technique (right). Lower values indicate better performance. Asterisks denote significant pairwise comparisons (* $\mathbf{p < 0.05}$, ** $\mathbf{p < 0.01}$, *** $\mathbf{p < 0.001}$).