The Effects of Proprioceptive and Visual Feedback on Geographical Orientation in Virtual Environments

Abstract

To effectively use a virtual environment (VE) for applications such as training and design evaluation, a good sense of orientation is needed in the VE. “Natural” human geographical orientation, when moving around in the world, relies on visual as well as proprioceptive feedback. However, the present navigation metaphors that are used to move around in the VE often lack proprioceptive feedback. To investigate the possible consequences this may have, an experiment was conducted on the relative contributions of visual and proprioceptive feedback on path integration in VE. Subjects were immersed in a virtual forest and were asked to turn specific angles under different combinations of visual, vestibular, and kinesthetic feedback (pure visual, visual plus vestibular, visual plus vestibular plus kinesthetic, pure vestibular, and vestibular plus kinesthetic). Furthermore, two visual conditions with different visual flows were tested: normal visual flow and decreased visual flow provided by a 60% zoom. Results show that kinesthetic feedback provides the most reliable and accurate source of information to use for path integration, indicating the benefits of incorporating this kind of feedback in navigation metaphors. Orientation based on visual flow alone is most inaccurate and unreliable. In all conditions, subjects overestimated their turning speed and subsequently didn't turn far enough. Both the absolute errors and the variation in path integration increase with the length of the path.

Do We Need to Walk for Effective Virtual Reality Navigation? Physical Rotations Alone May Suffice

“…Whereas previous studies showed a clear benefit of physical rotation cues only for simple spatial task (Bakker et al, 1999;Klatzky et al, 1998;Lathrop & Kaiser, 2002;Pausch et al, 1997), but not for more complex navigation tasks Ruddle & Lessels, 2006, the current study provides first evidence that allowing VR users control simulated rotations with their own body can have significant benefits over mere joystick navigation. Moreover, navigation performance in this real-turn mode was statistically equivalent to performance for actual walking in six out of eight dependent variables, and the real-turn mode even reduced the amount of viewing direction changes significantly.…”

“…Previous studies suggest that adding physical rotations cues can improve spatial orientation performance compared to visual-only simulations for various basic spatial tasks (Bakker, Werkhoven, & Passenier, 1999;Klatzky et al, 1998;Lathrop & Kaiser, 2002;Pausch et al, 1997).…”

Evidence of Separable Spatial Representations in a Virtual Navigation Task.

“…Nonetheless, virtual environments that include self-locomotion (Bakker, Werkhoven, & Passenier, 1999;May & Klatzky, 2000;May, Wartenberg, & Peruch, 1997;Steck, Mochnatzky, & Mallot, 2003) or passive reception of movement (Christou & Bülthoff, 2000;Foreman & Wilson, 1996;Höll, Leplow, Schönfeld, & Mehdorn, 2003;Kirschen, Kahana, Sekuler, & Burack, 2000;Mallot, Gillner, van Venn, & Bülthoff, 1998;Nadel et al, 1998;Péruch & Gaunet, 1998;Waller, Beall, & Loomis, 2004) provide sufficient information for spatial orientation. Yet, it remains unclear whether a further reduction of the sensory input by means of a simple computer-based simulation is sufficient to allow for accurate spatial orientation.…”

Navigating virtual mazes: The benefits of audiovisual landmarks

“…Virtual environments can be more complex than natural environments with respect to their scale [4,2], structural complexity and dimensionality [5]. Furthermore, virtual environments often differ from natural environments with respect to the sensory modalities involved, depending on the use of visual, auditory and vestibular displays [6,7,8,9,10,11] and interaction methods [8]. Thus, an optimal support of human spatial navigation in virtual environments relies on knowing the effects of involving multiple sensory modalities.…”