Comparative Analysis Between a Traditional Video Conference and an Immersive Type for Deictic Signaling

Vista sencilla de ítem
dc.creatorFlórez Marulanda, Juan Fernando
dc.creatorValencia Mesa, Diego Fernando
dc.creatorMuñoz España, Elena
dc.creatorCollazos, César
dc.creatorHurtado Alegría, Julio Ariel
dc.creatorSturm, Christian
dc.date2026-05-26
dc.date.accessioned2026-05-30T06:30:14Z
dc.descriptionVideoconferencing systems (VCS) are widely used in hybrid and online education; however, they remain limited. The aim of this study was to compare the perception of immersion, communication, and social presence mediated by a traditional VCS versus an immersive VCS during a remote tutoring activity. To this end, an immersive VCS with spatial coherence was designed, allowing each participant to vary his image position and make augmented signaling on the slides. The methodology used was a quasi-experiment with two groups: control and treatment. Two tutoring videos (one professor with two students) were recorded: one using traditional VCS (control) and the other using immersive VCS (treatment), which were presented to each group. Perception responses were obtained from 43 student observers using quantitative questionnaires (Likert scale) and open-ended questions. The results obtained (t-test and Mann-Whitney tests) did not show significant differences in perceived immersion or communication (p-values of 0.47103 and 0.53044, respectively) between the two VCS. However, a t-test indicated a significant difference (p-value = 0.042) in perceived social presence between immersive VCS and traditional VCS. The ability to change the participant's image position, along with student-teacher and student-student interactions, was perceived as a positive element of the immersive VCS, whereas augmented deictic signaling was not. Qualitative analysis revealed evaluative neutrality among observers between VCSs due to technical limitations (latency, audio delays, and complex handling of the signaling device). It is concluded that the spatial coherence of immersive VCS enhances immersion perception and significantly benefits social presence by facilitating observation of gestures, perception of emotions, and bodily signaling. Future research should address the limiting technical aspects of the current immersive SVC prototype.en-US
dc.descriptionLos sistemas de videoconferencia (SVC) se utilizan ampliamente en educación online e híbrida; sin embargo, aún presentan limitaciones. El objetivo de este trabajo fue comparar la percepción de inmersión, comunicación y presencia social mediada por un SVC tradicional frente a una inmersiva durante una actividad de asesoría a distancia. Para ello, se diseñó una SVC inmersiva con coherencia espacial que permite a cada participante variar la posición de su imagen y señalar de forma aumentada sobre las diapositivas. La metodología utilizada fue un cuasiexperimento con dos grupos: control y tratamiento. Se realizaron dos videos de asesoría (un profesor con dos estudiantes): uno con el SVC tradicional (control) y otro con el SVC inmersivo (tratamiento), que fueron presentados a cada grupo. Se obtuvieron respuestas de percepción de 43 estudiantes observadores mediante cuestionarios cuantitativos (escala de Likert) y preguntas abiertas. Los resultados obtenidos (test t y Mann-Whitney) no mostraron diferencias significativas en la percepción de inmersión ni de comunicación (p-value de 0.47103 y 0.53044) entre los dos SVC. Sin embargo, una prueba t indicó una diferencia significativa (p-value = 0.042) en la percepción de la presencia social en el SVC inmersivo con respecto al tradicional. La capacidad de cambiar de lugar la imagen del participante, junto a las interacciones estudiante-profesor y estudiante-estudiante, se percibió como elemento positivo en el SVC inmersivo, pero no así la señalización deíctica aumentada. El análisis cualitativo reveló una neutralidad evaluativa de los observadores entre los SVC debido a limitaciones técnicas (latencia, retrasos de audio y manejo complejo del señalizador). Se concluye que la coherencia espacial del SVC inmersivo favorece la percepción de inmersión, pero beneficia significativamente la presencia social, ya que facilita observar gestos, percibir emociones y señalizar con el cuerpo. Las investigaciones futuras deberán abordar los aspectos técnicos limitantes del prototipo actual del SVC inmersivo.es-ES
dc.formatapplication/pdf
dc.identifierhttps://revistas.itm.edu.co/index.php/tecnologicas/article/view/3573
dc.identifier10.22430/22565337.3573
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12622/8164
dc.languagespa
dc.publisherInstituto Tecnológico Metropolitano (ITM)en-US
dc.relationhttps://revistas.itm.edu.co/index.php/tecnologicas/article/view/3573/4082
dc.relation/*ref*/C. A. Warden, J. O. Stanworth, J. Biao Ren, and A. R. Warden, “Synchronous learning best practices: An action research study,” Comput. Educ., vol. 63, pp. 197-207, Apr. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2012.11.010
dc.relation/*ref*/P. Pérez, E. González-Sosa, J. Gutiérrez, and N. García, “Emerging Immersive Communication Systems: Overview, Taxonomy, and Good Practices for QoE Assessment,” Front. Signal Process., vol. 2, p. 917684, Jul. 2022. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsip.2022.917684
dc.relation/*ref*/P. R. Lowenthal, J. Borup, R. E. West, and L. Archambault, “Thinking Beyond Zoom: Using Asynchronous Video to Maintain Connection and Engagement During the COVID-19 Pandemic,” J. Technol. Teach. Educat., vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 383-391, 2020. https://doi.org/10.70725/331114ctnutj
dc.relation/*ref*/G. Orhan, and Ö. Beyhan, “Teachers’ perceptions and teaching experiences on distance education through synchronous video conferencing during covid-19 pandemic,” Soc. Sci. Educ. Res. Rev., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 8-44, Jul. 2020. https://ideas.repec.org/a/edt/jsserr/v7y2020i1p8-44.html
dc.relation/*ref*/M. Bonfert et al., “Seeing the faces is so important—Experiences from online team meetings on commercial virtual reality platforms,” Front. Virtual Real., vol. 3, p. 945791, Jan. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3389/frvir.2022.945791
dc.relation/*ref*/R. E. Mayer, G. Makransky, and J. Parong, “The Promise and Pitfalls of Learning in Immersive Virtual Reality,” Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact., vol. 39, no. 11, pp. 2229-2238, Aug. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2108563
dc.relation/*ref*/P. Fuchs, Virtual Reality Headsets - A theoretical and Pragmatic Approach. London, UK: CRC Press/Balkema, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315208244
dc.relation/*ref*/M. A. Camilleri, and A. C. Camilleri, “Remote learning via video conferencing technologies: Implications for research and practice,” Technol. Soc., vol. 68, p. 101881, Feb. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2022.101881
dc.relation/*ref*/A. W. Lo, B. Stevens, and S. P. Willems, “World of EdCraft: Challenges and Opportunities in Synchronous Online Teaching,” Harv. Data Sci. Rev., vol. 4, no. 2, Apr. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1162/99608f92.73a1c910
dc.relation/*ref*/Z. Katai, and D. Iclanzan, “Impact of instructor on-slide presence in synchronous e-learning,” Educ. Inf. Technol., vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 3089-3115, Mar. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11306-y
dc.relation/*ref*/J. F. Florez Marulanda, “Student Satisfaction Pilot Experience with Synchronous Classroom Live Streaming Styles during the COVID-19 Pandemic,” IEE Rev. Iberoam. Tecnol. Aprend., vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 301-306, Aug. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1109/RITA.2022.3191285
dc.relation/*ref*/M. W. Bülow, “Designing Synchronous Hybrid Learning Spaces: Challenges and Opportunities,” in Hybrid Learning Spaces, E. Gil, Y. Mor, Y. Dimitriadis, and C. Köppe, Eds., Cham, SWI: Springer, 2022, pp. 135-163. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-88520-5_9
dc.relation/*ref*/M. Lombard, T. B. Ditton, and L. Weinstein, “Measuring Presence: The Temple Presence Inventory,” in Proceed. 12th annual int. workshop presence, Los Ángeles, California, 2009, pp. 1-15. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228450541
dc.relation/*ref*/S. Tugba Bulu, “Place presence, social presence, co-presence, and satisfaction in virtual worlds,” Comput. Educ., vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 154-161, Jan. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.024
dc.relation/*ref*/J. Short, E. Williams, and B. Christie, The social psychology of telecommunications. London, UK: Wiley, 1976. https://archive.org/details/socialpsychology0000shor
dc.relation/*ref*/C. S. Oh, J. N. Bailenson, and G. F. Welch, “A systematic review of social presence: Definition, antecedents, and implications,” Front. Robot AI, vol. 5, p. 114, Oct. 2018. https://doi.org/10.3389/frobt.2018.00114
dc.relation/*ref*/J. F. Flórez Marulanda, C. A. Collazos, and J. A. Hurtado, “Evaluating an Immersive Virtual Classroom as an Augmented Reality Platform in Synchronous Remote Learning,” Information, vol. 14, no. 10, p. 543, Oct. 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/info14100543
dc.relation/*ref*/N. Yankelovich, W. Walker, P. Roberts, M. Wessler, J. Kaplan, and J. Provino, “Meeting Central: Making Distributed Meetings More Effective,” In Proceed. 2004 ACM Conf. Comput. Support. Coop. Work (CSCW '04), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1145/1031607.1031678
dc.relation/*ref*/I. Rae, G. Venolia, J. C. Tang, and D. Molnar, “A framework for understanding and designing telepresence,” in Proceed. 2015 ACM Int. Conf. Comput.-Support. Coop. Work Soc. Comput., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2015, pp. 1552-1566. https://doi.org/10.1145/2675133.2675141
dc.relation/*ref*/C. Neustaedter, G. Venolia, J. Procyk, and D. Hawkins, “To beam or not to beam: A study of remote telepresence attendance at an academic conference,” in Proceed. ACM Conf. Comput. Support. Coop. Work, CSCW, Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2016, pp. 418-431. https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2819922
dc.relation/*ref*/M. Billinghurst, S. Bee, J. Bowskill, and H. Kato, “Asymmetries in Collaborative Wearable Interfaces,” In Digest of Papers. Third Int. Symp. Wearable Comput., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1999, pp. 133-140. https://doi.org/10/dqx596
dc.relation/*ref*/T. Watanabe, “Viewpoint of Class Subject and Classroom Space on Face-to-face Course and Online Course,” in Proceed. 2021 15th Int. Conf. Ubiquitous Inform. Manage. Communic., IMCOM 2021, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Seoul, Korea, 2021, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1109/IMCOM51814.2021.9377385
dc.relation/*ref*/J. N. Bailenson, “Nonverbal Overload: A Theoretical Argument for the Causes of Zoom Fatigue,” Technol. Mind Behav., vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-6. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000030
dc.relation/*ref*/G. Fauville, M. Luo, A. C. M Queiroz, J. N. Bailenson, and J. Hancock, “Nonverbal Mechanisms Predict Zoom Fatigue and Explain Why Women Experience Higher Levels than Men,” SSRN Electron. J., Apr. 2021. http://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3820035
dc.relation/*ref*/R. Susanna, “Video fatigue and a late-night host with no audience inspire a new way to help people feel together, remotely,” news.microsoft.com, Accessed: Jul. 1, 2025. [Online.] Available: https://news.microsoft.com/source/features/work-life/microsoft-teams-together-mode/
dc.relation/*ref*/J. E. Grønbæk, B. Saatçi, C. F. Griggio, and C. Klokmose, “MirrorBlender: Supporting Hybrid Meetings with a Malleable Video-Conferencing System,” In Proceed. Int. Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2021, p. 451, pp. 1-13. http://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445698
dc.relation/*ref*/E. Hu, J. E. S. Grønbæk, A. Houck, and S. Heo, “OpenMic: Utilizing Proxemic Metaphors for Conversational Floor Transitions in Multiparty Video Meetings,” in Proceed. Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2023, p. 796, pp. 1-17. http://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581013
dc.relation/*ref*/B. Branch, C. Efstratiou, P. Mirowski, K. W. Mathewson, and P. Allain, “Tele-Immersive Improv,” in Proceed. 2021 CHI Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2021, p. 458, pp. 1-13. http://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445310
dc.relation/*ref*/A. Narayanan, E. Hu, and S. Heo, “Enabling Remote Hand Guidance in Video Calls Using Directional Force Illusion,” in Companion Public. 2022 Conf. Comput. Support. Coop. Work Soc. Comput., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2022, pp. 135-139. http://doi.org/10.1145/3500868.3559470
dc.relation/*ref*/N. Saquib, R. H. Kazi, L. Wei, and W. Li, “Interactive Body-Driven Graphics for Augmented Video Performance,” in Proceed. 2019 CHI Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2019, paper 622, pp. 1-12. http://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300852
dc.relation/*ref*/E. Hu, J. E. S. Grønbæk, W. Ying, R. Du, and S. Heo, “ThingShare: Ad-Hoc Digital Copies of Physical Objects for Sharing Things in Video Meetings,” in Proceed. Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2023, p. 364, pp. 1-22. http://doi.org/10.1145/3544548.3581148
dc.relation/*ref*/B. D. Hall, L. Bartram, and M. Brehmer, “Augmented Chironomia for Presenting Data to Remote Audiences,” in Proceed. 35th Annual ACM Sympos. User Interf. Softw. Technol. (UIST '22), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2022, p. 18, pp. 1-14. http://doi.org/10.1145/3526113.3545614
dc.relation/*ref*/J. U. Davis, P. Asente, and X. Yang, “Multimodal Direct Manipulation in Video Conferencing: Challenges and Opportunities,” in Proceed. 2023 ACM Conf. Design. Interact. Syst. (DIS '23), New York, NY, USA, 2023, pp. 1174-1193. http://doi.org/10.1145/3563657.3596099
dc.relation/*ref*/J. E. Grønbæk, “Designing eXtended reality experiences for the future of hybrid meetings,” XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 20-25, Sep. 2022. http://doi.org/10.1145/3558190
dc.relation/*ref*/J. F. Florez, D. F. Valencia M. E. Muñoz, C. A. Collazos, J. A. Hurtado, and C. Sturm, “Aula virtual inmersiva de señalización deíctica grupal para educación remota,” in 11 Jorn. Iberoamer. Inter. Hum. – Comput., H. L. García, L. A. Flores Chaires, V. Agredo Delgado, and P. H. Ruiz, Eds., Programa Editorial UAZ, Zacatecas, México, 2025, pp. 100-107. http://148.217.50.3/jspui/bitstream/20.500.11845/4180/1/11JIHC25_proceedings_Vol2.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/I. Ruiz, S. Romero, García, J., and I. Angulo, “Moodle: una herramienta eficaz aplicada a la enseñanza de prácticas, en el área de electrónica y arquitectura de computadores,” in VIII Congr. Tecnol. Aplic. Enseña. Electrón., Zaragoza, España, 2008, p. 165. https://www.asociaciontaee.org/actas/2008/papers/2008S3C05.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/P. C. Santana-Mancilla, O. A. Montesinos-López, M. A. García-Ruiz, J. J. Contreras-Castillo, and L. S. Gaytan-Lugo, “Validación de un instrumento para medir la aceptación tecnológica de un entorno virtual de aprendizaje,” Acta Univ., vol. 29, pp. 1-15, Apr. 2019. https://doi.org/10.15174/au.2019.1796
dc.relation/*ref*/M. Schutt, B. S. Allen, and M. A. Laumakis, “The Effects of Instructor Immediacy Behaviours in Online Learning Environments,” Q. Rev. Distance Educ., vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 135-148, Jun. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRDE-06-2009-0005
dc.relation/*ref*/V. Braun, and V. Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology.,” Qual. Res. Psychol., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 77-101, Jul. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
dc.relation/*ref*/B. Branch, P. W. Mirowski, S. Ppali, R. von Jungenfeld, P. Allain, and C. Efstratiou, “Mirror Placement Matters in Remote Collaboration,” in Ext. Abstr. 2023 CHI Conf. Hum. Fact. Comput. Syst., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2023, p. 207, pp. 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544549.3585798
dc.relation/*ref*/J. C. Tang et al., “Perspectives: Creating Inclusive and Equitable Hybrid Meeting Experiences,” in Proc. ACM Hum. Comput. Interact., vol. 7, no. CSCW2, p. 351, Oct. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1145/3610200
dc.relation/*ref*/B. Saatçi, K. Akyüz, S. Rintel, and C. N. Klokmose, “(Re)Configuring Hybrid Meetings: Moving from User-Centered Design to Meeting-Centered Design,” Comput. Support. Coop. Work, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 769-794, Dec. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10606-020-09385-x
dc.relation/*ref*/D.-T. Duong-Le, D.-N. Ly, T.-N. Le, V.-T. Nguyen, and K.-D. Le, “MultiPointing: Supporting Multiple Users’ Pointing in Hybrid Meetings,” in Proceed. 37th Austral. Conf. Hum.-Comput. Interact., Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2025, pp. 819-827. https://doi.org/10.1145/3764687.3769933
dc.relation/*ref*/J. J. Cummings, and J. N. Bailenson, “How Immersive Is Enough? A Meta-Analysis of the Effect of Immersive Technology on User Presence,” Media Psychol., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 272-309, Apr. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/15213269.2015.1015740
dc.relation/*ref*/J. Kleinau, and E. Hoggan, “Mediating Meeting Dynamics: An Exploration of AI-Based Multimodal Feedback in Hybrid Meetings,” in Proc. 23rd EUSSET Conf. Comput.-Support. Cooper. Work, Newcastle, UK, 2025. https://doi.org/10.48340/ecscw2025_cp04
dc.relation/*ref*/J. E. S. Grønbaek et al., “Mirrorverse: Live Tailoring of Video Conferencing Interfaces,” In Proceed. 36th Annual ACM Sympos. User Interf. Softw. Technol. (UIST '23), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2023, p. 14, pp. 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3586183.3606767
dc.relation/*ref*/M. Constantinides, and D. Quercia, “The Future of Hybrid Meetings,” in Proceed. 1st Annual Meet. Sympos. Hum.-Comput. Interact. Work (CHIWORK '22), Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2022, p. 6, pp. 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533406.3533415
dc.relation/*ref*/V. Bajpai et al., “Recommendations for Designing Hybrid Conferences,” SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 63-69, Apr. 2022. https://doi.org/10.1145/3544912.3544920
dc.relation/*ref*/J. Kleinau, “Transitioning and Navigating Space in Hybrid Collaboration.,” in Proceed. 23rd EUSSET Conf. Comput.-Support. Cooper. Work, European Society for Socially Embedded Technologies, 2025, Newcastle, UK, pp. 2510-2591. https://doi.org/10.48340/ecscw2025_ws02_02
dc.relation/*ref*/A. Elmokashfi et al., “A Multi-Perspective Study of Internet Performance during the COVID-19 Outbreak,” 2021, arXiv:2101.05030. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2101.05030
dc.relation/*ref*/Y. Tri Prasetyo et al., “Determining Factors Affecting Customer Loyalty to Internet Service Provider during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach,” in Proceed.-2022 Asia-Pacific Comput. Technol. Conf., APCT 2022, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc., Wuhan, China, 2022, pp. 21-31. https://doi.org/10.1109/APCT55107.2022.00009
dc.relation/*ref*/B. Rogers, M. Apperley, E. Delos Reyes, and M. Masoodian, “Wedge Video: Supporting Remote Participants in a Mixed-Mode Videoconference Meeting,” Interact. Comput., vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 666-680, Sep. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwad032
dc.relation/*ref*/P. Luff, C. Heath, N. Yamashita, H. Kuzuoka, and M. Jirotka, “Embedded Reference: Translocating Gestures in Video-Mediated Interaction,” Res. Lang. Soc. Interact., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 342-361, Oct. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1080/08351813.2016.1199088
dc.relation/*ref*/J. J. Cummings, and E. E. Wertz, “Capturing social presence: Concept explication through an empirical analysis of social presence measures,” J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun., vol. 28, no. 1, Jan. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmac027
dc.relation/*ref*/J. J. Cummings and B. Wertz, “Technological Predictors of Social Presence: A Foundation for a Meta-Analytic Review and Empirical Concept Explication,” in Proceed. 10th Annual Int. Works. Presence, Boston, 2018. https://matthewlombard.com/ISPR/Proceedings/2018/P2018-Cummings%20&%20Wertz.pdf
dc.relation/*ref*/
dc.rightsCopyright (c) 2026 TecnoLógicasen-US
dc.rightshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0en-US
dc.sourceTecnoLógicas; Vol. 29 No. 66 (2026); e3573en-US
dc.sourceTecnoLógicas; Vol. 29 Núm. 66 (2026); e3573es-ES
dc.source2256-5337
dc.source0123-7799
dc.subjectaprendizaje a distanciaes-ES
dc.subjectaprendizaje inmersivoes-ES
dc.subjectenseñanza asistida por computadores-ES
dc.subjectvideoconferenciaes-ES
dc.subjectvirtualidad aumentadaes-ES
dc.subjectdistance learningen-US
dc.subjectimmersive learningen-US
dc.subjectcomputer aided instructionen-US
dc.subjectvideo conferencingen-US
dc.subjectaugmented virtualityen-US
dc.titleComparative Analysis Between a Traditional Video Conference and an Immersive Type for Deictic Signalingen-US
dc.titleAnálisis comparativo entre una videoconferencia tradicional y una tipo inmersivo para señalizar deícticamentees-ES
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.typeResearch Papersen-US
dc.typeArtículos de investigaciónes-ES

Archivos

Bloque original

Mostrando 1 - 1 de 1
Miniatura
Nombre:
3573_v29n66.pdf
Tamaño:
843.42 KB
Formato:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Descargar

Colecciones

Revista TecnoLógicas - Cosecha Portal de Revistas