|
| Question | Median | Mean | Std |
|
| (1) Involvement and connectedness |
| (1.1) In the remote environment, I had a sense of “being there.” | 3.5 | 4.17 | 1.77 |
| (1.2) The sense of playing in the remote environment was compelling. | 5.0 | 4.50 | 1.50 |
| (1.3) I had a sense of playing in the remote environment, rather than performing something from outside. | 4.0 | 3.80 | 1.17 |
| (1.4) How aware were you of the real world surroundings around you during the performance? | 4.5 | 4.00 | 1.91 |
| (1.5) How completely were you able to actively survey the musical environment using vision? | 4.0 | 3.83 | 1.57 |
| (1.6) How completely were you able to actively survey the musical environment using audition? | 5.0 | 4.67 | 0.94 |
| (1.7) The delay affected the sense of involvement. | 4.5 | 4.00 | 1.63 |
|
| (2) Coherence |
| (2.1) The musical interaction in the remote environment seemed natural. | 5.0 | 5.00 | 0.82 |
| (2.2) The environment was responsive to actions that I performed. | 4.0 | 4.00 | 1.83 |
| (2.3) How much did your musical experience in the remote environment seem consistent with your real world experiences? | 4.0 | 4.40 | 1.36 |
| (2.4) I was able to anticipate the musical outcome in response to my performance in the remote environment. | 5.0 | 5.00 | 1.00 |
| (2.5) The environment was responsive to actions performed by my partner. | 4.5 | 4.25 | 1.48 |
| (2.6) How realistic did the remote environment seem to you? | 4.5 | 4.33 | 0.75 |
| (2.7) I was able to anticipate the musical outcome in response to the performance by my partner in the remote environment | 4.0 | 3.83 | 1.21 |
| (2.8) It was difficult to cope with the distance performance. | 4.0 | 3.83 | 1.57 |
|
| (3) Interface awareness and quality |
| (3.1) How well could you concentrate on the music performance rather than on the mechanisms required to perform? | 5.5 | 5.00 | 1.53 |
| (3.2) How aware were you of the display and control devices/mechanism? | 4.0 | 4.00 | 1.10 |
| (3.3) How much did the visual display quality interfere or distract from performing? | 3.0 | 3.17 | 1.21 |
| (3.4) How much did the auditory display quality interfere or distract from performing? | 6.0 | 5.17 | 1.46 |
| (3.5) How much delay did you experience between your actions and expected outcomes? | 4.5 | 4.33 | 1.60 |
|
| (4) Quality of the immersion |
| (4.1) The visual representation made me feel involved in the remote environment. | 3.0 | 3.33 | 0.94 |
| (4.2) The auditory representation made me feel involved in the remote environment. | 4.0 | 4.00 | 1.73 |
| (4.3) I felt involved in the remote environment experience. | 5.0 | 4.60 | 0.49 |
|
| (5) Quality of the music performance |
| (5.1) How quickly did you adjust to the experience of playing in the remote environment? | 4.5 | 4.17 | 1.67 |
| (5.2) It was easy to cope with the delay to adjust the quality of the performance. | 3.5 | 3.33 | 1.25 |
| (5.3) How proficient in remote music playing did you feel at the end of the experience? | 5.0 | 4.67 | 1.89 |
| (5.4) The delay affected the quality of my performance. | 5.0 | 4.33 | 1.80 |
|
