IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine - May 2018 - 88

Finally, we evaluated the content review task using the
NASA TLX questionnaire. Figure 5(b) presents the respective
mean values of the mental, physical, and temporal demand. It
also shows self-assessment for performance, effort, and frustration. The total average workload reported scored 23.04%
^SD = 9.91 h in the laboratory study and 25.42% ^SD = 12.32 h
in the field experiment, respectively. The lowest parameters
measured were physical demand (laboratory) and temporal
demand (field), and the highest was self-performance.
We speculate that the high score in performance derived
from the markerless technique for visual tracking that we
employed. Especially for the outdoor scenario, the tracking system showed a rather weak performance on sunny, clear days,
when many reflections occurred on the map. Participants needed to find an initial point with respect to a map where tracking
worked best before starting to review the content. We hypothesize that other tracking techniques (e.g., point cloud tracking or
edge tracking) might result in better performance.
During a semistructured discussion portion at the end of
each session, participants provided valuable insights about
scenarios where the SkiAR system could be used, and suggested extensions to the system for better meeting skiers' and
snowboarders' needs. Four categories emerged during our
qualitative analysis:
1) the perceived purpose of the system
2) augmented content
3) suggestions for interaction design
4) envisioned application scenarios of the system beyond
winter activities.
Our subjects found SkiAR to be useful in tasks that aid
decision making, group organization, and self-reflection, and
felt that it helped to provide better awareness while on the
slope. We provide a summary of the findings that emerged
from a thematic analysis of the participants' contextual interviews and observations. The report of our in-depth details
and discussion are available in a separate publication [18].
We found that sharing and discussing hazards is crucial in
making group decisions about where to go next (which is
especially relevant when going off-piste in an unfamiliar location). Group members considered pictures taken during the
day to be less important for decision making, but instead useful for a review after a ski day within the group and beyond it,
for storytelling purposes. Additionally, the subjects mentioned
that future augmented human technology for the slopes should
afford the current location and the status of skiers within a
group as important content. Beyond that, they felt that, when
it comes to decision making in situ, it would be advantageous
for the prototype to include waiting times at a ski lift, up-todate contextual data (e.g., weather, visibility, and snow conditions), and reference information (e.g., deals on the daily
menu at a restaurant, discounts on rental equipment, and the
last bus schedule).
Next, two interesting aspects that our studies showed were
the need to take into account points of interaction (i.e., the location where actual group decisions are taken) as well as the temporal aspects of interactions (i.e., the fact that those interactions
88 IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine

MAy 2018

are often time constrained) when designing in situ content-sharing systems that support decision making. For example, we
observed that interaction with a shared ski map is rather short,
with people quickly deciding where they want to go. On the
other hand, during a lift ride, people often have more time to
discuss their decisions. An explicit follow-up mechanism could
be useful, allowing one to pick up a prior conversation and/or
decision taken (e.g., during a lift ride) and present it again at a
later time (e.g., at a poster-sized map).
Finally, we found that the general SkiAR concept can also
be extended to nonsports situations, such as disaster simulation scenarios and other simulation practices, using physical
maps that involve group coordination and decision making.

DISCUSSION
Given the nature of the methodology we chose for our study (a
qualitative inquiry), we had no control condition to measure
the effect of our system for the activities that require collaboration, decision making, and sense making in front of a ski resort
map. A control condition was lacking for two reasons.
1) Current navigation options (e.g., physical paper maps or
digital maps on a smartphone) do not take into account
user-generated content.
2) Alternative setups (e.g., handheld AR) are often found
inconvenient for the winter context.
However, even though there is no direct equivalent to our
system among traditional decision-making practices on the
slope, future research would benefit from a quantitative
inquiry. Nevertheless, we believe that probing the prototype
both in the laboratory and the field helped participants envision various application scenarios and provided the opportunity to include personalized content in a discussion in front
of a map. This enabled us to collect design requirements and
answer our research questions about perceived usefulness
and purpose, system usability, and important types of content to share in a group when making decisions on where to
go next on a ski slope (or even off-piste). Our current study
provided a first set of insights into how technology might be
used in collaborative skiing: what kind of personalized content can be used in decision making within a group and how
virtual augmentations of this content can be presented on a
ski map.
We further argue that the SkiAR prototype enabled decision making on the slope and group coordination that are crucial not only for the overall safety of the group but that also
contribute to overall skiing enjoyment. In particular, specialized disciplines, such as backcountry skiing and ski touring,
require comprehensive awareness of environmental conditions
and hazards that could be present in the off-piste skiing areas.
Thus, informing all group members about potential dangers
that have been spotted or making the right path selection can
be vital for the safety of the skiers as a group.

FUTURE WORK
Despite the preliminary positive results, our studies face
some significant limitations. For example, the s-Helmet is far

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of IEEE Consumer Electronics Magazine - May 2018