Evaluating the User Experience of an Augmented Reality Prototype for Enterprise Architecture

Bibtex

@Select Types{,
  
   
  
   
  title    = "Evaluating the User Experience of an Augmented Reality Prototype for Enterprise Architecture", 
  author    = "Kevin Rehring and Frederik Ahlemann", 
  doi    = "https://doi.org/10.30844/wi_2020_i3-rehring", 
  abstract    = "Enterprise architecture (EA) visualizations like text, diagrams, and models are commonly displayed on 2D screens and are manipulated with a computer mouse and keyboard. The additional application of augmented reality (AR) promises improvements in terms of understanding complex architectural relationships and enables more natural manipulation of visualizations, ultimately leading to better decision-making. As part of a Design Science Research (DSR) project, we report on an empirical evaluation of user experience of an EA visualizing prototype deployed on an optical see-through head-mounted display (HMD) with 13 practitioners. The examined prototype displays a three-layer model that allows the analysis of randomly generated EAs. The participants performed 13 tasks which differed in complexity and context. In this study we qualitatively observe users’ behavior. Our results indicate that AR is suitable to analyze EA. In particular those stakeholders less experienced with EA can benefit from utilizing EA visualizations in AR.

", 
  keywords    = "Enterprise architecture visualization, augmented reality evaluation, head-mounted display, evaluating user experience", 
}

Abstract

Abstract

Enterprise architecture (EA) visualizations like text, diagrams, and models are commonly displayed on 2D screens and are manipulated with a computer mouse and keyboard. The additional application of augmented reality (AR) promises improvements in terms of understanding complex architectural relationships and enables more natural manipulation of visualizations, ultimately leading to better decision-making. As part of a Design Science Research (DSR) project, we report on an empirical evaluation of user experience of an EA visualizing prototype deployed on an optical see-through head-mounted display (HMD) with 13 practitioners. The examined prototype displays a three-layer model that allows the analysis of randomly generated EAs. The participants performed 13 tasks which differed in complexity and context. In this study we qualitatively observe users’ behavior. Our results indicate that AR is suitable to analyze EA. In particular those stakeholders less experienced with EA can benefit from utilizing EA visualizations in AR.

Keywords

Schlüsselwörter

Enterprise architecture visualization, augmented reality evaluation, head-mounted display, evaluating user experience

References

Referenzen

1. Kortekamp, S.-S., Werning, S., Thomas, O., Ickerott, I.: THE FUTURE OF DIGITAL WORK – USE CASES FOR AUGMENTED REALITY GLASSES. In: ECIS 2019. , Sweden (2019).
2. Milgram, P., Takemura, H., Utsumi, A., Kishino, F.: Augmented Reality: A class of displays on the reality-virtuality continuum. Telemanipulator Telepresence Technol. 2351, 282–292 (1994).
3. Azuma, R.T.: A survey of augmented reality. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ. 6, 355–385 (1997).
4. Olshannikova, E., Ometov, A., Koucheryavy, Y., Olsson, T.: Visualizing Big Data with augmented and virtual reality: challenges and research agenda. J. Big Data. 2, 1–27 (2015).
5. Dunleavy, M., Dede, C., Mitchell, R.: Affordances and Limitations of Immersive Participatory Augmented Reality Simulations for Teaching and Learning. J. Sci. Educ. Technol. 18, 7–22 (2009).
6. Wang, X., Love, P.E.D., Kim, M.J., Wang, W.: Mutual awareness in collaborative design: An Augmented Reality integrated telepresence system. Comput. Ind. 65, 314–324 (2014).
7. Sommerauer, P., Müller, O.: Augmented reality in informal learning environments: A field experiment in a mathematics exhibition. Comput. Educ. 79, 59–68 (2014).
8. Deck, C., Jahedi, S.: The effect of cognitive load on economic decision making: A survey and new experiments. Eur. Econ. Rev. 78, 97–119 (2015).
9. Steffen, J., Gaskin, J., Meservy, T., Jenkins, J.: The Missing Framework for Virtually Assisted Activities. In: Thirty eighth International Conference on Information Systems. , Seoul (2017).
10. Wu, H.-K., Lee, S.W.-Y., Chang, H.-Y., Liang, J.-C.: Current status, opportunities and challenges of augmented reality in education. Comput. Educ. 62, 41–49 (2013).
11. Vovk, A., Wild, F., Guest, W., Kuula, T.: Simulator Sickness in Augmented Reality Training Using the Microsoft HoloLens. In: Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. p. 209. ACM (2018).
12. Meola, A., Cutolo, F., Carbone, M., Cagnazzo, F., Ferrari, M., Ferrari, V.: Augmented reality in neurosurgery: a systematic review. Neurosurg. Rev. 40, 537–548 (2017).
13. Lee, K.: Augmented Reality in Education and Training. 56, 9 (2012).
14. Merino, L., Bergel, A., Nierstrasz, O.: Overcoming issues of 3D software visualization through immersive augmented reality. In: 2018 IEEE Working Conference on Software Visualization (VISSOFT). pp. 54–64. , Madrid, Spain (2018).
15. Hiekkanen, K., Korhonen, J.J., Collin, J., Patricio, E., Helenius, M., Mykkänen, J.: Architects’ Perceptions on EA Use – An Empirical Study. In: 2013 IEEE 15th Conference on Business Informatics. pp. 292–297 (2013).
16. Löhe, J., Legner, C.: Overcoming implementation challenges in enterprise architecture management: a design theory for architecture-driven IT Management (ADRIMA). Inf. Syst. E-Bus. Manag. 12, 101–137 (2014).
17. Tamm, T., Seddon, P.B., Shanks, G., Reynolds, P.: How does enterprise architecture add value to organisations. Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst. 28, 141–168 (2011).
18. The Open Group: TOGAF® Version 9. Van Haren Publishing (2009).
19. Roth, S., Zec, M., Matthes, F.: Enterprise Architecture Visualization Tool Survey 2014. epubli GmbH, Germany (2014).
20. Rehring, K., Greulich, M., Bredenfeld, L., Ahlemann, F.: Let’s Get in Touch – Decision Making about Enterprise Architecture Using 3D Visualization in Augmented Reality. In: Proceedings of the 52nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (2019).
21. Lam, H., Bertini, E., Isenberg, P., Plaisant, C., Carpendale, S.: Empirical Studies in Information Visualization: Seven Scenarios. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 18, 1520– 1536 (2012).
22. Greenberg, S., Buxton, B.: Usability evaluation considered harmful (some of the time). In: Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual CHI conference on Human factors in computing systems – CHI ’08. p. 111. ACM Press, Florence, Italy (2008).
23. Foorthuis, R., Steenbergen, M., Brinkkemper, S., Bruls, W.A.: A theory building study of enterprise architecture practices and benefits. Inf. Syst. Front. 18, 541–564 (2016).
24. The Open Group: ArchiMate® 2.0 Specification. van Haren Publishing (2012).
25. Microsoft.github.io.: Mixed Reality Toolkit Documentation, https://microsoft.github.io/ MixedRealityToolkit-Unity, last accessed 2019/07/23.
26. Rehring, K., Brée, T., Gulden, J., Bredenfeld, L.: CONCEPTUALIZING EA CITIES: TOWARDS VISUALIZING ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURES AS CITIES. In: Proceedings of the 27th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Stockholm & Uppsala, Sweden (2019).

Most viewed articles

Meist angesehene Beiträge

GITO events | library.gito