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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Proceedings of SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering |
| Editors | B.E. Rogowitz, T.N. Pappas, S.J. Daly |
| Pages | 344-355 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Volume | 5666 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2005 |
| Externally published | Yes |
| Event | Proceedings of SPIE-IS and T Electronic Imaging - Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X - San Jose, CA, United States Duration: 2005 Jan 17 → 2005 Jan 20 |
Other
| Other | Proceedings of SPIE-IS and T Electronic Imaging - Human Vision and Electronic Imaging X |
|---|---|
| Country | United States |
| City | San Jose, CA |
| Period | 05/1/17 → 05/1/20 |
Fingerprint
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
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 proceeding › Conference contribution
}
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 -