Distance Estimation in Virtual Environments

Lampton, Donald R.; McDonald, Daniel P.; Singer, Michael J.; Bliss, James P.

doi:10.1177/154193129503902006

Cited by 69 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In virtual environments, perceived egocentric distances tend to be underestimated when compared to the same distance judgments in the real world. This underestimation may reach 47% of the true distance 2,3 , thereby impacting the ability for a user to interact in the virtual world as in the real one.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial constraints for 3D perception in helmet-mounted displays

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Distance judgments in virtual environments and Head-mounted Displays (HMD) systems are generally underestimated compared with judgments in the real world. Some visual depth cues may be absent or modified, according to the technology used.After a brief review of the literature pertaining to the representation of depth in Helmet-Mounted Displays, we explore two possible causes for the reduced distance perception in virtual environments: the increased interocular separation (or hyperstereopsis) and the reduction of the field of view.Some laboratory and training ground data are reported. The effective influence of each factor on space perception is discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial constraints for 3D perception in helmet-mounted displays

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The result was shown to be better for a nonimmersive VR environment (desktop with joystick) than the virtual motion controller (VMC). Similarly, in a study by Lampton et al (1995), performance differences between a lowcost HMD (IVE condition) and standard PC-based simulator and monitor were evaluated using two groups for distance estimation tasks. The result showed that distance estimation was less accurate with the PC-based group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of human interaction with virtual environment training technology

Ntuen¹,

Yoon²

2002

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

REPORT Public reporting burder for this collection of information is estibated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burder 14. ABSTRACT This research investigated the evidence of performance improvement of piloting skills while using an immersive virtual environment (IVE) versus a nonimmersive virtual environment (NIVE) to train instrument pilot skills. The general hypothesis tested was whether there is equal improvement for people trained under IVE and NIVE. Subjects were tested in IVE and NIVE flight scenarios using three flying tasks?normal crosswind approach and landing (NCAL), go-around (GA), and constant speed during climbing and descending (CSCD). Data were analyzed for two measures ? errors and error rate, for four dependent variables: altitude control, heading control, airspeed control, and vertical airspeed control. Overall, results failed to demonstrate enhanced training effectiveness for an immersive VR training environment compared to a desktop (nonimmersive) environment. These results indicate that the cost tradeoff between the uses of IVE over NIVE are task dependent and influenced by the fidelity of training environments. The results obtained from the current experiment do justify some potential cost-saving advantage of IVE over NIVE on selected task. For example, NIVE seems to provide training advantages on error rate reduction on control of vertical airspeed and altitude under NCAL tasks. Similarly, IVE seems to offer training advantages of error rate reduction on airspeed control and heading control under NCAL, and heading and vertical airspeed controls under GA tasks. However, the fact that either IVE or NIVE provides an increase in piloting task performance in some tasks needs to be considered in any training investment decision. REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE AD...

show abstract

“…It is well documented that humans underestimate distances more in virtual environments (VE) than in the real world (Lampton, Singer, McDonald, & Bliss, 1995;Witmer and Kline, 1998;Thompson et al, 2004). According to Witmer and Kline (1998), the texture and pattern of the floor in the VE did not significantly affect observers' judgment of distance, nor did the movement method employed by the observer (e.g., moving via a treadmill versus using a joystick).…”

Section: Degraded Depth Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Human-Robot Interface: Issues in Operator Performance, Interface Design, and Technologies

Chen¹,

Haas²,

Pillalamarri³

et al. 2006

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) July 20062. REPORT TYPE ARL-TR-3834 SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES ABSTRACTThis report tries to examine salient issues in robotic operator performance and reviews some of the promising user interface solutions, in designs and technologies. The first section concerns general issues in human-robot interaction and operator control unit designs. The second section presents the controlling of teleoperated and semi-autonomous robots and its associated human performance issues as well as user interface solutions. The last section surveys potential innovative technologies for enhancing the performance of robotic operators. Specifically, it concerns multimodal technologies, including voice recognition/synthesis systems, bone conduction and throat microphones, and tactile systems. SUBJECT TERMSauditory control and display, haptic display, human-robot interface, human-robot interaction, multi-modal, robotic operator performance SECURITY

show abstract

Distance Estimation in Virtual Environments

Cited by 69 publications

References 2 publications

Spatial constraints for 3D perception in helmet-mounted displays

Spatial constraints for 3D perception in helmet-mounted displays

Assessment of human interaction with virtual environment training technology

Human-Robot Interface: Issues in Operator Performance, Interface Design, and Technologies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About