Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs

Bernhard E. Riecke, Jörg Schulte-Pelkum, Heinrich Bulthoff

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In Virtual Reality, considerable systematic spatial orientation problems frequently occur that do not happen in comparable real-world situations. This study investigated possible origins of these problems by examining the influence of visual field of view (FOV) and type of display device (head-mounted display (HMD) vs. projection screens) on basic human spatial orientation behavior. In Experiment 1, participants had to reproduce traveled distances and to turn specified target angles in a simple virtual environment without any landmarks that was projected onto a 180° half-cylindrical projection screen. As expected, distance reproduction performance showed only small systematic errors. Turning performance, however, was unexpectedly almost perfect (gain=0.97), with negligible systematic errors and minimal variability, which is unprecedented in the literature. In Experiment 2, turning performance was compared between a projection screen (FOV 84°×63°), an HMD (40°×30°), and blinders (40°×30°) that restricted the FOV on the screen. Performance was best with the screen (gain 0.77) and worst with the HMD (gain 0.57). We found a significant difference between blinders (gain 0.73) and HMD, which indicates that different display devices can influence ego-motion perception differentially, even if the physical FOVs are equal. We conclude that the type of display device (HMD vs. curved projection screen) seems to be more critical than the FOV for the perception of ego-rotations. Furthermore, large, curved projection screens yielded better performance than HMDs.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering
EditorsB.E. Rogowitz, T.N. Pappas, S.J. Daly
Pages344-355
Number of pages12
Volume5666
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2005
Externally publishedYes
EventProceedings of SPIE-IS and T Electronic Imaging - Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X - San Jose, CA, United States
Duration: 2005 Jan 172005 Jan 20

Other

OtherProceedings of SPIE-IS and T Electronic Imaging - Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X
CountryUnited States
CitySan Jose, CA
Period05/1/1705/1/20

Fingerprint

Helmet mounted displays
helmet mounted displays
virtual reality
Projection screens
Virtual reality
Display devices
projection
field of view
display devices
Systematic errors
systematic errors
motion perception
visual fields
landmarks
Experiments

Keywords

  • HMD
  • Motion simulator
  • Navigation
  • Projection screen
  • Psychophysics
  • Self-motion
  • Spatial cognition
  • Virtual Reality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Electrical and Electronic Engineering
  • Condensed Matter Physics

Cite this

Riecke, B. E., Schulte-Pelkum, J., & Bulthoff, H. (2005). Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs. In B. E. Rogowitz, T. N. Pappas, & S. J. Daly (Eds.), Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering (Vol. 5666, pp. 344-355). [48] https://doi.org/10.1117/12.610846

Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs. / Riecke, Bernhard E.; Schulte-Pelkum, Jörg; Bulthoff, Heinrich.

Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering. ed. / B.E. Rogowitz; T.N. Pappas; S.J. Daly. Vol. 5666 2005. p. 344-355 48.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Riecke, BE, Schulte-Pelkum, J & Bulthoff, H 2005, Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs. in BE Rogowitz, TN Pappas & SJ Daly (eds), Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering. vol. 5666, 48, pp. 344-355, Proceedings of SPIE-IS and T Electronic Imaging - Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X, San Jose, CA, United States, 05/1/17. https://doi.org/10.1117/12.610846
Riecke BE, Schulte-Pelkum J, Bulthoff H. Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs. In Rogowitz BE, Pappas TN, Daly SJ, editors, Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering. Vol. 5666. 2005. p. 344-355. 48 https://doi.org/10.1117/12.610846
Riecke, Bernhard E. ; Schulte-Pelkum, Jörg ; Bulthoff, Heinrich. / Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs. Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering. editor / B.E. Rogowitz ; T.N. Pappas ; S.J. Daly. Vol. 5666 2005. pp. 344-355
@inproceedings{a0810224e5d8443cbfe7eec013b3afb5,
title = "Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs",
abstract = "In Virtual Reality, considerable systematic spatial orientation problems frequently occur that do not happen in comparable real-world situations. This study investigated possible origins of these problems by examining the influence of visual field of view (FOV) and type of display device (head-mounted display (HMD) vs. projection screens) on basic human spatial orientation behavior. In Experiment 1, participants had to reproduce traveled distances and to turn specified target angles in a simple virtual environment without any landmarks that was projected onto a 180° half-cylindrical projection screen. As expected, distance reproduction performance showed only small systematic errors. Turning performance, however, was unexpectedly almost perfect (gain=0.97), with negligible systematic errors and minimal variability, which is unprecedented in the literature. In Experiment 2, turning performance was compared between a projection screen (FOV 84°×63°), an HMD (40°×30°), and blinders (40°×30°) that restricted the FOV on the screen. Performance was best with the screen (gain 0.77) and worst with the HMD (gain 0.57). We found a significant difference between blinders (gain 0.73) and HMD, which indicates that different display devices can influence ego-motion perception differentially, even if the physical FOVs are equal. We conclude that the type of display device (HMD vs. curved projection screen) seems to be more critical than the FOV for the perception of ego-rotations. Furthermore, large, curved projection screens yielded better performance than HMDs.",
keywords = "HMD, Motion simulator, Navigation, Projection screen, Psychophysics, Self-motion, Spatial cognition, Virtual Reality",
author = "Riecke, {Bernhard E.} and J{\"o}rg Schulte-Pelkum and Heinrich Bulthoff",
year = "2005",
doi = "10.1117/12.610846",
language = "English",
volume = "5666",
pages = "344--355",
editor = "B.E. Rogowitz and T.N. Pappas and S.J. Daly",
booktitle = "Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Perceiving simulated ego-motions in virtual reality -comparing large screen displays with HMDs

AU - Riecke, Bernhard E.

AU - Schulte-Pelkum, Jörg

AU - Bulthoff, Heinrich

PY - 2005

Y1 - 2005

N2 - In Virtual Reality, considerable systematic spatial orientation problems frequently occur that do not happen in comparable real-world situations. This study investigated possible origins of these problems by examining the influence of visual field of view (FOV) and type of display device (head-mounted display (HMD) vs. projection screens) on basic human spatial orientation behavior. In Experiment 1, participants had to reproduce traveled distances and to turn specified target angles in a simple virtual environment without any landmarks that was projected onto a 180° half-cylindrical projection screen. As expected, distance reproduction performance showed only small systematic errors. Turning performance, however, was unexpectedly almost perfect (gain=0.97), with negligible systematic errors and minimal variability, which is unprecedented in the literature. In Experiment 2, turning performance was compared between a projection screen (FOV 84°×63°), an HMD (40°×30°), and blinders (40°×30°) that restricted the FOV on the screen. Performance was best with the screen (gain 0.77) and worst with the HMD (gain 0.57). We found a significant difference between blinders (gain 0.73) and HMD, which indicates that different display devices can influence ego-motion perception differentially, even if the physical FOVs are equal. We conclude that the type of display device (HMD vs. curved projection screen) seems to be more critical than the FOV for the perception of ego-rotations. Furthermore, large, curved projection screens yielded better performance than HMDs.

AB - In Virtual Reality, considerable systematic spatial orientation problems frequently occur that do not happen in comparable real-world situations. This study investigated possible origins of these problems by examining the influence of visual field of view (FOV) and type of display device (head-mounted display (HMD) vs. projection screens) on basic human spatial orientation behavior. In Experiment 1, participants had to reproduce traveled distances and to turn specified target angles in a simple virtual environment without any landmarks that was projected onto a 180° half-cylindrical projection screen. As expected, distance reproduction performance showed only small systematic errors. Turning performance, however, was unexpectedly almost perfect (gain=0.97), with negligible systematic errors and minimal variability, which is unprecedented in the literature. In Experiment 2, turning performance was compared between a projection screen (FOV 84°×63°), an HMD (40°×30°), and blinders (40°×30°) that restricted the FOV on the screen. Performance was best with the screen (gain 0.77) and worst with the HMD (gain 0.57). We found a significant difference between blinders (gain 0.73) and HMD, which indicates that different display devices can influence ego-motion perception differentially, even if the physical FOVs are equal. We conclude that the type of display device (HMD vs. curved projection screen) seems to be more critical than the FOV for the perception of ego-rotations. Furthermore, large, curved projection screens yielded better performance than HMDs.

KW - HMD

KW - Motion simulator

KW - Navigation

KW - Projection screen

KW - Psychophysics

KW - Self-motion

KW - Spatial cognition

KW - Virtual Reality

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=21944441373&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=21944441373&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1117/12.610846

DO - 10.1117/12.610846

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:21944441373

VL - 5666

SP - 344

EP - 355

BT - Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering

A2 - Rogowitz, B.E.

A2 - Pappas, T.N.

A2 - Daly, S.J.

ER -