MEASURES USED OR SUGGESTED

SOURCES

Transportation
"You Are There":

"Subjects were asked how often...

"I felt I was in the world the television created"

"The television-generated world seemed to me to be more like 'somewhere that I visited' rather than 'something that I saw"

"My body was in this room, but my mind was inside the world created by the television"
  • Kim (1996)
"Sense of ‘being there’ in the virtual environment"
"Extent to which the virtual environment became the dominant reality"
"Extent to which the virtual environment became a place, rather than just images"

(7 point response scale; index score is number of high scores (6 or 7) on the three items )
  • Slater, Steed & Usoh (1993)
Participants given a definition of presence that "emphasized the feeling that [they] were physically located in and surrounded by the portrayed visual world, rather than in the laboratory in which they knew the experiment to be taking place"; then given a 100 point response scale to rate the "size of perceived difference" between the presence-impact of two environments.
  • Welch, Blackman, Liu, Mellers, & Stark (1996)
"Sense of being there"
"Sense of inclusion in the virtual world"
"Sense of presence in the virtual world"

(10 point response scale)
  • Barfield & Weghorst (1993)
"How much of a sense of participation in the scene did you feel?"

"How much of a sense of involvement in the scene did you feel?"
  • Ditton (1997)
"To what extent did you experience a sense of being 'really there' inside the virtual environment?"
  • Slater & Usoh (1993)
Subjects agreed/disagreed with statement indicating they felt they were "in a different place."
  • Taylor (1997)
"They (television serials) give opportunities to experience adventures and exciting environments."

(response scale unknown)
  • Nordlund (1978)
"In sharkworld [a virtual environment], I felt like ..."

(1 = I was standing in the laboratory, wearing a virtual reality helmet; 7 = I was in some sort of ocean, near a shark-infested shipwreck)

"Did the virtual world seem more like something you saw or someplace you visited?"

(1 = something I saw; 7 = some place I visited)
  • Prothero & Hoffman (1995)
"How much did the experience seem to transport you into the environment?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did you feel as if you were inside the environment observing the events?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did you feel as if you were inside the environment participating in the events?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did it feel as if you visited another place?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
Self Assessment Manikin (SAM) measure (9-point):

(click here for larger version)
  • Potential (new) item created by Lang
"It is Here":

"How much did you feel like it was happening to you?"

(1 = not at all; 10 = very much)
  • Lombard, Grabe, Reich, Campanella, & Ditton (1996)
"Did the virtual world seem more like a picture or more like a scene looked at through a window?"

(1 = like a picture; 7 = like looking through a window)
  • Prothero & Hoffman (1995)
Asked 3 and 4 year old children if they believed that "an object seen on videotape could be touched or could come out if the top of the set were removed, whether it would spill out of the open container it was in if the set were turned upside down, and whether a person seen on videotape could see, hear, and know about the experimenter's ongoing actions" (p. 402).
  • Flavell, Flavell, Green, & Korfmacher (1990)
"How much did it seem as if the objects/people in the environment approached the place where you were sitting/standing?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did it seem as if the [objects/people] in the environment could touch you?" [e.g., for 3-D simulation rides]

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did it seem as if you could reach out and touch the [objects/people]?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How often when an object seemed to be headed toward you did you want to move to get out of its way?"

(1=never; 7 = very often)
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
"We Are Together" (shared space):

Asked subjects to agree/disagree with statements such as "[It felt] as if we were all in the same room" and "[It felt] like a real face-to-face meeting" (p. 301).

  • Muhlbach, Bocker, & Prussog (1995)
"How much did it seem as if you and the other people were together in the same place?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did it seem as if the other people had come to the place you were?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did it seem as if you went to the place where the other people were?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did it seem as if you and the other people both left the places where you were and went to a new place?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
Immersion/Involvement
Count the number of users' senses that are provided with input and the degree to which inputs from the physical environment are "shut out" (IV)
  • Biocca & Delaney (1995)
  • Kim (1996)
Measured "involvement" with items:
  • "intense"
  • "fun"
  • "competitive"
  • "addictive"
  • "exciting"
  • Heeter (1995)
"To what extent were there times when you felt that the virtual world became the "reality" for you, and you almost forgot about the real world outside?"

(1 = at no time; 7 = almost all the time)
  • Prothero & Hoffman (1995)
"How aware were you of events occurring in the real world around you?"

"How much did the visual aspects of the environment involve you?"

(7 point scale)
  • Witmer & Singer (1998)
"To what extent did you feel like you were inside the environment?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"To what extent did you feel immersed in the environment?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"To what extent did you feel surrounded by the environment?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"To what extent did you feel submerged in the environment?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

Distractibility:

Researcher provides tones of specific frequency at irregular intervals during media experience; ask subject "How distracting were the tones you heard?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

(see Festinger, 19XX)

"How long did your [viewing/interactive] experience last?"

(1 = very short time; 7 = very long time)

(experience with greater immersion should be perceived as having been of shorter duration)

"Immediately after this experience to what extent did each of the following occur?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

  • Reduced eye-hand coordination
  • Flashbacks
  • Illusory sensations of climbing and turning
  • Reduced motor control

(see Azar, 1996, p. 25).
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
"Becoming extremely involved in a good book or movie is somewhat rare for me." (Agree/Disagree)

"I got involved with the feelings of hte characters in the [X]." (Agree/Disagree)

"I was objectivve watching the [X], I didn't get caught up in it." (Agree/Disagree)

"After seeing the [X], I felt as though I were one of the characters." (Agree/Disagree)
  • Potential (new) items created by Basil, based on Davis (1983)
Social Richness of Medium
Subjects perform various tasks with different media and evaluate each medium via a series of bipolar, 7-point semantic differential items:
  • Impersonal-Personal
  • Unsociable-Sociable
  • Insensitive-Sensitive
  • Cold-Warm
  • Perse, Buton, Kovner, Lears, & Sen (1992)
  • Short, Williams, & Christie (1976)
Subjects perform various tasks via medium and evaluate medium via bipolar, 7-point semantic differential items:
  • Unemotional-Emotional
  • Inaccessible-Accessible
  • Dead-Lively
  • Dull-Vivid
  • Remote-Near
  • Removed-Close
  • Distant-Immediate
  • Unresponsive-Responsive
  • Informal-Formal
  • Unfriendly-Friendly
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
Medium Richness / Information Richness
Researcher must assess a medium's "capacity for immediate feedback, the number of senses involved, personalization, and language variety" (p. 4)
  • Rice (1992)
[COMING SOON]
  • Rice, D'Ambra, & More (1998)
  • Rice (1993)
Perceived media richness:

"To what extent would you characterize [medium] as having the ability to:

  • give and receive timely feedback
  • transmit a variety of different cues beyond the explicit message (e.g., nonverbal cues)
  • tailor messages to your own or other personal circumstances
  • use rich and varied language
  • provide immediate feedback
  • convey multiple types of information (verbal and nonverbal)
  • transmit varied symbols (e.g., words, numbers, pictures)
  • design messages to your own or others' requirements"

(1 = not at all; 7 = to a very great extent)
  • Webster & Trevino (1995)
  • Webster & Hackley (1997)
  • Trevino, Webster, & Stein (2000)
Turntaking:

Researcher assesses degree to which turntaking process is flexible vs. rigid (e.g., flexible with standard phone, unix talk vs. rigid with speakerphone, batch e-mail).

Customization:

Researcher assesses degree to which flow of interaction is predetermined vs. modified for user (e.g., some Automatic Teller Machines identify user by name when card is inserted).

Interactivity:

Researcher assesses number of previous messages/interaction steps acknowledged in current message/step (e.g., Automatic Teller Machines retain no memory of user's previous interactions, even within one session vs. complex videogames or VR environments in which previous user actions are incorporated into current interaction.
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
Intimacy:

Observe the degree to which interactants vary the following during interaction to establish an equilibrium between conflicting approach and avoidance forces and thereby optimize an overall level of intimacy:

  • Physical proximity
  • Eye-contact
  • Intimacy of conversation topic/language style
  • Amount of smiling
  • Posture and arm position
  • Trunk and body orientation
  • Gestures
  • Facial expressions
  • Body relaxation
  • Touching
  • Laughter
  • Speech duration
  • Voice quality
  • Olfactory cues
  • Argyle & Dean (1965)
  • Cappella (1981)
  • Hall (1966)
  • Mehrabian (1969)
  • Patterson (1973)
  • Weiner & Mehrabian (1968)
Realism
Asked subjects to report evaluation of the "sensation of reality" they experienced.
  • Hatada, Sakata, & Kusaka (1980)
Viewers evaluated a "sensation of realism effect."
  • Neuman (1990)
"How real did the virtual world seem to you?" (1 = about as real as an imagined world; 7 = indistinguishable from the real world)
  • Prothero & Hoffman (1995)
Asked VR users, "How real did the overall experience feel?"

(response scale not known)
  • Heeter (1995)
"Television shows what people in the news are really like."

(response scale not known)
  • Levy (1979)
Perceptual Realism:

"In the questions that follow please evaluate the quality of your experience for each of the human senses."

"How much did the experience sound like it would if you had experienced it directly?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did the experience look like it would if you had experienced it directly?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did the experience smell like it would if you had experienced it directly?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did touching the [objects/people] feel like it would if you had experienced them directly?

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

"How much did [specific objects; specific people; specific characteristics of environment temperature, humidity, etc.] feel like it would if you had experienced it directly?"

(1=not at all; 7 = very much)

 Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
"How inconsistent or disconnected was the information coming from your various senses?"

(7 point scale)
  • Witmer & Singer (1998)
Social Realism:

"The events I saw really happened - they are factual."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

"The events I saw did not really happen - they are fictional."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

Magic Window/True to Life dimension: Extent to which experience is an accurate representation of the real world or participant's perceptions of real world:

"The way in which [the doctor talked to the patient] is a lot like the way [doctors talk to patients] in the real world"

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

Plausibility dimension: Extent to which experience could happen in the real world, and

Probability dimension: Likelihood of experience happening in real world

"In the real world it is likely that [a doctor would talk to a patient] as [the doctor talked to the patient]. "

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

Instruction dimension: Extent which experience is useful to the participant in real life:

"The experience helped me know more about what really happens [when a doctor talks to a patient]."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

Identity dimension: Extent to which participant observes similarity between people/events in mediated experience and people/events in their own lives:

"The way [the doctor talked to the patient] is a lot like the way [my doctor talks] to me."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

Temporal Realism:

"The events seemed to be actually occurring at the time I watched them."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

"The events seemed to have occurred in the exact sequence in which I watched them but at an earlier time; the events were being replayed."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)

"The events seemed to have occurred in a different sequence from the sequence in which I watched them and at an earlier time; the events were constructed or edited together so they would seem to have occurred in a different order."

(1=strongly disagree; 7=strongly agree)
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000); see Busselle (1995); Lombard & Ditton (1997); Potter (1988)
Interactivity/Control
"How much were you able to control events?"

(7 point scale)
  • Witmer & Singer (1998)
Social Actor Within Medium
Parasocial Interaction/Relationship:

Observe viewing behavior in which subject speaks to media characters/personae.
  • Lemish (1982)
"The newscasters are almost like friends you see everyday."

"I like hearing the voices of the newscasters in my house."

"When the newscaster shows how he feels about the news, it helps me make up my mind about that news item."

"I feel sorry for the newscasters when they make a mistake."
  • Levy (1979)
Newscasters talk to me as if actually in my home.

Daily visit helps make my problem easier to handle.

Like to know more about off the job.

Almost like an everyday friend of mine.

Everyday visit helps make me feel contented.

(exact wording unknown)
  • Houlberg (1984)
1. "The news program shows me what the newscasters are like."

2. "When the newscasters joke around with one another it makes the news easier to watch."

3. "When my favorite newscaster shows me how he or she feels about the news, it helps make up my own mind about the news story."

4. "I feel sorry for my favorite newscaster when he or she makes a mistake."

5. "When I'm watching the newscast, I feel as if I am part of their group."

6. "I like to compare my own ideas with what my favorite newscaster says."

7. "The newscaster makes me feel comfortable, as if I am with friends."

8. "I see my favorite newscaster as a natural, down-to-earth person."

9. "I like hearing the voice of my favorite newscaster in my home."

10. "My favorite newscaster keeps me company when the news is on television."

11. "I look forward to watching my favorite newscaster on tonight's news."

12. "If my favorite newscaster appeared on another television program, I would watch that program."

13. "When my favorite newscaster reports a story, he or she seems to understand the kinds of things I want to know."

14. "I sometimes make remarks to my favorite newscaster during the newscast."

15. "If there were a story about my favorite newscaster in a newspaper or magazine, I would read it."

16. "I miss seeing my favorite newscaster when he or she is on vacation."

17. "I would like to meet my favorite newscaster in person."

18. "I find my favorite newscaster is like an old friend."

19. "I find my favorite newscaster to be attractive."

20. "I am not as satisfied when I get my news from a newscaster different than my favorite newscaster."
  • Rubin, Perse, & Powell (1985)
"Do you ever talk to television character while you watch television programs?"

"Do you call television stations to voice your concern or interest regarding television programs?"

"Do you send any kinds of letters to voice your concern or interest regarding television programs?"

(Never/Sometimes/Often/Very often/Always)

"Who is your favorite television character (or persona)? __________ on what program? __________"

IF you do not have a favorite television character, is there a favorite program to watch?__________"

"I sometimes make remarks to my favorite television character during the program."

"I like to compare my own ideas with what my favorite television character says."

"Sometimes it almost feels as if someone in the program is talking directly to me."

"Sometimes I think that one of the people in the program seems so real that I can almost talk to him (her)."

"Sometimes I think that one of the people in the program talks to me as if I am actually in my home."

(Very strongly disagree/Strongly disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree/Very strongly agree)

Please rate your [favorite television character/best friend/closest acquaintance/yourself/closest family member] on the following scale.

(6 point scale)

  • Active/Passive
  • Dependent/Independent
  • Soft/Hard
  • Self-assured/Modest
  • Decisive/Deliberate
  • Seeks Protection/ Protective
  • Bold/Reserved
  • Negative/Positive
  • Competitive/Cooperative
  • Timid/Aggressive

[Favorite television character or one which you often watch...(6 point scale)]

Doesn’t think like me/Thinks like me

From social class similar to mine/From social class different from mine

Behaves like me/Doesn’t behave like me

Economic situation different from mine/Economic situation like mine

Similar to me/Different from me

Status like mine/Status different from mine

Unlike me/Like me

Background different from mine/Background similar to mine

1. I think he (she) could be friend of mine.

2. I would like to have a friendly chat with him (her).

3. It would be difficult to meet and talk with him (her).

4. We could never establish a personal friendship with each other.

5. He (she) just wouldn’t fit into my circle of friends.

6. He (she) would be pleasant to be with.

7. I feel I know him (her) personally.

8. He (she) is personally offensive to me.

9. I don’t care if I ever get to meet him (her).

10. I sometimes wish I were more like him (her).

11. I think he (she) is quite handsome (pretty).

12. He (she) is very sexy looking.

13. I find him (her) very attractive physically.

14. I don’t like the way he (she) looks.

15. He (she) is somewhat ugly.

16. He (she) wears neat clothes.

17. The clothes he (she) wears are not becoming.

18. He (she) is not very good looking.

19. She (he) is well groomed.

20. He (she) is repulsive to me.

21. I couldn’t get anything accomplished with him (her).

22. He (she) is a typical goof-off when assigned a job to do.

23. I have confidence in his (her) ability to get the job done.

24. If I wanted to get things done I could probably depend on him (her).

25. He (she) would be a poor problem solver.

26. I think studying with him (her) would be impossible.

27. You could count on him (her) getting a job done.

28. I have the feeling he (she) is a very slow worker.

29. If we put our heads together I think we could come up with some good ideas.

30. He (she) would be fun to work with.

31. If he (she) were feeling badly, my first duty would be to cheer him/her up.

32. I feel that I can confide in him (her) about virtually everything.

33. I find it easy to ignore his (her) faults.

34. I would do almost anything for him (her).

35. I feel very possessive toward him (her).

36. If I could never be with him (her), I would feel miserable.

37. If I were lonely, my first thought would be to seek him (her) out.

38. One of my primary concern is his (her) welfare.

39. I would forgive him (her) for practically anything.

40. I feel responsible for his (her) well being.

41. When I am with him (her), I spend a good deal of time just looking at him/her.

42. I would greatly enjoy being confided in by him (her).

43. It would be hard for me to get along without him (her).

44. I feel sorry for him (her) when he or she makes a mistake.

45. He (she) makes me feel comfortable, as if I am with friends.

46. I like hearing the voice of him (her) in my home.

47. If there were a story about him (her) in a newspaper or magazine, I would read it.

48. I find him (her) like an old friend.

49. I find him (her) to be attractive.

(Very strongly disagree/Strongly disagree/Disagree/Neutral/Agree/Strongly agree/Very strongly agree)
  • Park (1998)
"They (television serials) can give topics of conversation to use in one's contacts with friends and acquaintances."

"One can get to know the various personalities of the serial and become involved in their problems."

  • Nordlund (1978)
Medium as Social Actor
Researcher replicates social psychology finding concerning human-human interaction in the context of human-technology interaction
  • Nass, Lombard, Henriksen, & Steuer (1995)
  • Nass & Moon (1996a)
  • Nass & Moon (1996b)
  • Nass, Moon, Fogg, Reeves, & Dryer (1995)
  • Nass & Steuer (1994)
  • Nass, Steuer, Henriksen, & Dryer (1994)
  • Nass, Steuer, Tauber, & Reeder (1993)
Asked children to draw things that are alive and not alive; used drawings as basis for conversation about their notions of "aliveness" and "life."

Had children sort pictures of objects into "alive" and "not alive" categories and explain choices. Objects were:

  • The sun
  • An alarm clock
  • A cloud
  • A dog
  • An automobile
  • An airplane
  • Superman
  • A Muppet
  • An insect
  • A tree
  • A snake
  • A bicycle
  • A telephone
  • A television set
  • A typewriter

Gave children opportunity to play with variety of objects (dolls, toys, trucks, computer toys [Merlin, Simon, Speak and Spelll, Big Track]) and asked them about objects' "aliveness."
  • Turkle (1984)
  • Turkle (1995)
"Do you think computers or things that contain computers will be able to do the following things in twenty-five years? [can do .. at the present time]?

(1 = Definitely will not; 6 = Definitely will)

  • Admire art
  • Be angry
  • Be annoyed
  • Compose original music
  • Be ashamed
  • Be embarrassed
  • Have a sense of humor
  • Be forgiving
  • Be friendly
  • Hear
  • Be frustrated
  • Be helpful
  • Learn from past experience
  • Be impatient
  • Be jealous
  • See
  • Be lonely
  • Be loyal
  • Carry on a conversation
  • Be nervous
  • Be uncertain
  • Understand spoken English
  • Be polite
  • Be sympathetic
  • Understand written English
  • Be worried"

Multi-dimensional scaling (similarity/distance) items (all pairs presented):

  • Computer
  • Doctor
  • Secretary
  • Foreigner
  • Parent
  • Stranger
  • Politician
  • Television
  • Friend
  • Teacher
  • Telephone
  • Pet
  • Bank teller
  • Nass, Lombard, Henriksen, & Steuer (1995)
Personification:

"If you have a computer with Windows95, have you changed the label for the computer icon that was "My Computer" to something else?"

(yes/no)

"If you did change the "My Computer" label, what did you change it to? ______________"

"Many people give a name to their computer. Do you have a name for your computer?"

(yes/no)

"Many people speak about their computer as if it were alive (e.g., "the computer is not feeling well," "the computer is being uncooperative"). How often do you speak about your computer this way?"

(1 = never; 7 = very often)

"Many people speak to their computer as if it could hear them (e.g., "Please work," etc.). How often do you speak to your computer this way?"

(1 = never; 7 = very often)
  • Potential (new) items created by Lombard et al. (2000)
Physiological Responses
Simulator Sickness Questionnaire (SSQ) contains a checklist of 26 symptoms which subjects rate in severity ("none," "slight," "moderate," and "severe"); three subscales are for nausea, oculomotor disturbances, and disorientation.
  • Kennedy, Lane, Berbaum, & Lilienthal (1993)
  • (see also Biocca, 1992; Kennedy, Fowlkes, & Lilienthal, 1993)
 

Last updated: May 2000