Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Table 2
Average Likert scale and standard deviation results for the three environments, indicating
comparative satisfaction (significant chi-square
scores in
bold
)
Statement
Avg. Likert
SD
Chi sq
CAD
GIS
VE
CAD
GIS
VE
Interface is user-friendly
2.81
2.38
3.75
0.98
0.96
0.77
6.33
Simple to master basic operations
3.09
2.38
4.06
1.07
1.15
0.93
7.75
Easy to master 3D operations
2.84
2.38
3.81
1.15
0.96
0.65
7.88
Easy to edit details
2.81
2.50
3.97
1.22
1.15
0.59
9.10
Visualise the attempts accurately
3.06
2.88
3.62
1.29
1.31
0.81
1.75
Produce 3D products rapidly and efficiently
2.91
2.56
3.84
1.24
1.36
0.99
2.33
3D models have high fidelity
3.47
3.25
4.19
1.09
1.11
0.83
2.39
Estimating need for earth works/land use
3.40
3.63
3.69
1.04
1.09
1.01
0.08
Can be used for professional work
3.69
3.40
4.00
1.35
1.18
0.78
1.36
Can save time in design progress
3.03
2.60
3.43
1.19
1.59
1.21
0.47
Table 3
Average Likert scale and standard deviation results for VE-specific statements
Statement
Avg
SD
Employing VR in a future project
4.12
0.96
Can get comprehensive understanding of design context
4.09
0.58
Have an awareness of overall position
4.09
0.82
Simple to navigate from one place to another
4.37
0.72
Can modify details precisely via the tools in OpenSim
3.84
0.93
3D model better than 2D model
4.06
0.85
The graphic quality is good enough for urban design purposes
4.00
0.82
Feel more engaged than with other environments
3.84
1.06
Real-time enough for urban design purposes
4.00
1.09
more definite and narrow with VE than for the other two technologies. A Chi-square
test working on the null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between
the type of technology and frequency of positive response (Likert score >3) revealed
that four of the sets of statement responses, marked in bold, yielded significant
differences (
p
=
0.05:
χ
2
> 5.99; df
=
2). Therefore, we can say that the participants
as a whole asserted that the VE is the most user-friendly interface, with easy to under-
stand editing facilities and a fast learning curve to master basic and 3D operations.
The VE-specific results (Table
3
) revealed generally positive opinion on aspects
such as in-environment awareness, navigation, graphics, real-time aspects and
sense of engagement/presence within the environment.
4 Discussion
In the comparative usability assessment for CAD, GIS and VE as urban planning
tools, the virtual environment has generally come out best, significantly fostering
the most efficient task completions and generally topping satisfaction ratings
