Camera-Sourced Heart Rate Synchronicity: A Measure of Immersion in Audiovisual Experiences
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article is based on auditioning a clip renowned for its immersive soundtrack to a sample of participants with either high-end or basic audio presentation, with the objective of testing a means of measuring immersion using a camera-sourced heart rate (HR) synchronisation feature. The results showed no difference between assessing using: a camera-sourced ISC-HR feature, an equivalent contact sensor-sourced feature, and an immersion self-assessment questionnaire. It concludes that camera-sourced heart rate synchronicity is a viable means of indexing immersion for our chosen stimuli.
In the Introduction section the gap that the study is trying to feel is not very clearly argued. In the Background section relevant research on the concept of immersion is cited and analyzed.
In the Methodology section a lot of technical details are provided so that the experiment to be reproducible. As there is no information about the questions from the immersion questionnaire, I think it should be included in the supplementary materials and further analyzed in terms of validity.
Sections 4, 5, and 6 can be reunited in a Results section. Otherwise, results are clearly presented.
In the Discussion section the significance of the results should be analyzed by considering the literature presented in the Background section. As for the limitations of the results, more space should be given to the meaning of the outliers, imperfect correlations, and the lack of between-groups effect. Considering the limitations I have doubts that actually immersion was measured in the study, that’s why I propose using rather the concept of camera-sourced heart rate synchronicity.
In the Conclusion section some ethical concerns could be addressed regarding the sustainability of the results, and especially the future of implementing biotechnologies for commercial benefit.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 1,
Thank you for your comments. They have contributed to various improvements made to the manuscript.
Our responses to your comments be found in the attached document, alongside our responses to the other reviewers.
We have also uploaded a diff file which highlights all of the changes made in this revision. This should be available in the non-published material section.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsArticle: applsci-3014836-peer-review-v1
Camera Sourced Heart Rate Synchronicity: A Measure of
Immersion in Audiovisual Experiences
Joseph Williams 1,*,† , Jon Francombe 2 and Damian Murphy 1,†
Well written (2. BACKGROUND)
Well written article with depth.
Well organized and used references.
Line 483: (ISC-HR was calculated, using the formula shown in Section 1.3. Figure 5 shows the ….)
Comment: there is no section (Section 1.3.).
Article Figures:
Comment: Figures: All in gray-scale .. it will be much more effective to be colored plotted figures.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 2,
Thank you for your comments. They have contributed to various improvements made to the manuscript.
Our responses to your comments be found in the attached document, alongside our responses to the other reviewers.
We have also uploaded a diff file which highlights all of the changes made in this revision. This should be available in the non-published material section.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis paper is written very well, especilly, english expression. However, I cann't get the focus of this paper, what is the important contributions of this paper, can give in the abstract or Introduction. Also, i can not get the core scheme of this paper, can give a figure about general view of this paper. And i can not get the description of the scheme of this paper. Moreover, i indistinguishable this paper is a review or regular paper.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThis paper is written very well, especilly, english expression.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 3,
Thank you for your comments. They have contributed to various improvements made to the manuscript.
Our responses to your comments be found in the attached document, alongside our responses to the other reviewers.
We have also uploaded a diff file which highlights all of the changes made in this revision. This should be available in the non-published material section.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 4 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this work (Camera Sourced Heart Rate Synchronicity: A Measure of Immersion in Audiovisual Experiences), authors auditioned a clip renowned for its immersive soundtrack to a sample of participants with either high-end or basic audio presentation, with the objective of testing a means of measuring immersion using a camera-sourced heart rate (HR) synchronization feature. The authors claimed that the results of this study showed no difference in the feature, or the responses to an immersion questionnaire, between the participants in the two groups. Furthermore, they claimed that the camera-sourced HR synchronicity feature and the results of the immersion questionnaire correlated. Moreover, the camera-sourced HR synchronicity feature was found to correlate with an equivalent feature sourced from synchronously recorded electrocardiogram (ECG) data. Authers concluded that the present study confirmed the viability of using a camera instead of an ECG sensor to quantify heart rate synchronization but suggests that audio presentation alone is not capable of creating a measurable difference in the feeling of immersion, using our method.
Here is my comments on the work presented in this work:
1. Arrange the keywords in an alphabetical order
2. I suggest that the authors precisely define the problem statement of the current work and the advantages of the current work over the previously reported similar research.
3. Would you please state clearly what are the major advances and differences between the approach in the current work and that of the following previously reported work?
a. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00475-0
b. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-74954-5
c. http://dx.doi.org/10.17743/jaes.2021.0013
d. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelectrocard.2023.01.006
e. https://doi.org/10.53829/ntr201707ra1
f. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/I3DA57090.2023.10289267
g. https://doi.org/10.3389/frsip.2022.904866
h. https://doi.org/10.5535/arm.23019
4. I recommend that authors comment explicitly on the weakness/drawback of the current work.
5. While the idea of the work presented in this manuscript is interesting, the manuscript lake an in-depth analysis and discussion.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageN/A
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 4,
Thank you for your comments. They have contributed to various improvements made to the manuscript.
Our responses to your comments be found in the attached document, alongside our responses to the other reviewers.
We have also uploaded a diff file which highlights all of the changes made in this revision. This should be available in the non-published material section.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 5 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe manuscript represents a solid research on the analysis of immersion in audiovisual experiences using camera sourced heart rate synchronicity. Authors applied camera as data acquisition tool comparing results with traditional ECG method. Provided experimental research confirmed accuracy of proposed camera-sourced ISC-HR feature by correlation with ECG signal features.
Taking into account clarification of previous reviewers’ concerns, I would recommend this paper for publication as it is.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer 5,
Thank you for your comments. They have contributed to various improvements made to the manuscript.
Our responses to your comments be found in the attached document, alongside our responses to the other reviewers.
We have also uploaded a diff file which highlights all of the changes made in this revision. This should be available in the non-published material section.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsI have no problem.
