Why User Studies and Participant Experience Reporting Matter for VR Motion Privacy?
TL;DR
It is found that user studies explain substantially more variation in mechanism acceptance than physical deviation, although physical deviation remains significant.
Abstract
Public VR game leaderboards contain tracked motion recordings uploaded by hundreds of thousands of users. Once uploaded, these recordings are accessible to anyone and create privacy risks (i.e., identification and profiling). Prior work has proposed mechanisms that modify tracked movement to reduce these risks. Their utility is commonly evaluated through physical deviation, where smaller deviations indicate better utility, while user studies are less common. However, it remains unclear how well physical deviation explains users'acceptance of a mechanism compared to user studies. We examine this through a user study of three VR motion privacy mechanisms at five physical deviation levels. We find that user studies explain substantially more variation in mechanism acceptance than physical deviation, although physical deviation remains significant. We also find that prior VR experience and exposure to VR privacy mechanisms significantly affect acceptance. We recommend combining physical deviation with user studies and reporting participants'prior experience.
