![](bg4.png)
Figure 5: Number of subjects reporting a level of frustration
from 1 (very frustrated) to 5 (very satisfied).1 test subject
didn’t fill out the questionaire.
Figure 6: Number of subjects reporting a level of experi-
enced difficulty ranging from 1 (too difficult) to 5 (too easy).
1 test subject didn’t fill out the questionaire.
ferable motor skills is possible through training in a
VE. User feedback indicates that the dynamic diffi-
culty adjustments of gravity and velocity of thrown
balls created an experience where players were less
frustrated and provided a better training experience as
shown in Figures 5 and 6.
This could be explored further by letting the train-
ing span several days to reduce mental and physical
fatigue endured by subjects. Evaluating training over
longer periods of time would have been beneficial as
the short time makes the data more prone to be due to
chance. The reason that it was not possible to find any
difference between the two samples might also have
been due to the small sample size.
7 CONCLUSIONS
The experiment showed that the use of game design
can improve a training environment for juggling by
helping learners to maintain focus and by keeping the
learning experience engaging and interesting in spite
of a repetitive training process. This confirms earlier
research by Marshall et al. (Marshall et al., 2007).
Since these results and observations have all been
gathered using juggling training, they can not be gen-
eralized to skills beyond juggling. In order to draw
broader conclusions on the use and benefits of vir-
tual training environments for transfer of motor skills,
further research should be carried out across different
fields relying on motor skill development.
REFERENCES
Beek, P. J. and Lewbel, A. (1995). The Science of Juggling.
Scientific American, pages 92–97.
Charalambous, T. (2005). Interacting with a virtual envi-
ronment. http://www.themistoklis.org/mengthesis.pdf
[Last accessed: 12/20/2011].
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding Flow. Basic Books,
A Member of the Perseus Books Group.
Duncan Toys Company (2011). In-
structional cd rom. http://www.yo-
yo.com/index.php/site/products/3840JGIN [Last
accessed: 12/20/2011].
Kenyon, R. V. and Afenya, M. B. (1995). Training in vir-
tual and real environments. Annals of Biomedical En-
gineering, 23:445–455.
Lagarde, J., Gopher, D., Alberto Avizzano, C., Erev, V.,
Lippi, V., and Zelic, G. (2012). Training to juggle
with a light weight juggler (lwj). In Bergamasco,
M., Bardy, B., and Gopher, D., editors, Skill Training
in Multimodal Virtual Environments, pages 187–198.
CRC Press.
Logan, G. (1988). Toward an Instance Theory of Au-
tomatization. Psychological Review, 492-527, 1988,
95:492–527.
Marshall, J., Benford, S., and Pridmore, T. (2007). Eye-
balls: juggling with the virtual. In Proceedings of the
6th ACM SIGCHI conference on Creativity & cogni-
tion, C&C ’07, pages 265–266, New York, NY, USA.
ACM.
Microsoft Corporation (2011). Microsoft kinect sdk for
developers. http://kinectforwindows.org/ [Last ac-
cessed: 12/20/2011].
Peruch, P., Belingard, L., and Thinus-Blanc, C. (2000).
Transfer of spatial knowledge from virtual to real en-
vironments. In Freksa, C., Habel, C., Brauer, W.,
and Wender, K., editors, Spatial Cognition II, volume
1849 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages
253–264. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg.
Ravaja, N., Saari, T., Laarni, J., Kallinen, K., and Salminen,
M. (2005). The psychophysiology of video gaming
: Phasic emotional responses to game events. Pro-
ceedings of the DiGRA conference “Changing views
worlds in play”, it(4):1–13.
Unity Technologies (2011). Unity: Game development tool.
http://unity3d.com/ [Last accessed: 12/20/2011].
Witmer, B. G., Bailey, J. H., Knerr, B. W., and Parsons,
K. C. (1996). Virtual spaces and real world places:
transfer of route knowledge. Int. J. Hum.-Comput.
Stud., 45:413–428.
GRAPP2013-InternationalConferenceonComputerGraphicsTheoryandApplications
388