The influence of feedback on egocentric distance judgments in real and virtual environments

Abstract

A number of investigators have reported that distance judgments in virtual environments (VEs) are systematically smaller than distance judgments made in comparably-sized real environments. Many variables that may contribute to this difference have been investigated but none of them fully explain the distance compression. One approach to this problem that has implications for both VE applications and the study of perceptual mechanisms is to examine the influence of the feedback available to the user. Most generally, we asked whether feedback within a virtual environment would lead to more accurate estimations of distance. Next, given the prediction that some change in behavior would be observed, we asked whether specific adaptation effects would generalize to other indications of distance. Finally, we asked whether these effects would transfer from the VE to the real world. All distance judgments in the head-mounted display (HMD) became near accurate after three different forms of feedback were given within the HMD. However, not all feedback sessions within the HMD altered real world distance judgments. These results are discussed with respect to the perceptual and cognitive mechanisms that may be involved in the observed adaptation effects as well as the benefits of feedback for VE applications.

More than just perception–action recalibration: Walking through a virtual environment causes rescaling of perceived space

“…However, preinteraction walking judgments in Experiment 1 produced distance judgment ratios that were larger than those reported in past studies (0.73 versus approximately 0.55), which reduced the potential to observe a large increase in postinteraction judgments. Mohler et al (2006) reported preinteraction distance judgments that were similar to those found in Experiment 1, and postinteraction judgments in their study were near veridical. Differences in display technology might account for differences in preinteraction judgment ratios, and might also account for differences in the efficacy of interaction with the virtual environment.…”

“…Research on the effects of interaction with a virtual environment indicates that body-based movement through the environment with accompanying feedback is both necessary (Waller & Richardson, 2008) and sufficient (Mohler et al, 2006) to cause an increase in postinteraction distance judgments. However, it is unclear whether any body-based interaction, such as reaching or throwing, can cause an increase in postinteraction distance judgments, or whether walking is necessary.…”

“…Distance judgments were unaffected by interactions in which participants viewed simulated visual walking (i.e., optic flow only; Waller & Richardson, 2008), indicating the necessity of body-based movement. Furthermore, distance judgments increased after participants performed a blind-walking task in which they received visual or verbal feedback (Mohler et al, 2006;Richardson & Waller, 2005), indicating the sufficiency of body-based interaction and accompanying offline feedback.…”

“…Multiple studies have shown that a brief period of interaction, in which participants walk to various locations within the virtual environment while receiving visual feedback, can cause judgments of egocentric distance in the virtual environment to increase by up to 70 % (Mohler, Creem-Regehr, & Thompson, 2006;Richardson & Waller, 2005Waller & Richardson, 2008). This increase in postinteraction judgments appears to require physically walking through the virtual environment.…”

Virtual Distance Estimation in a CAVE

“…11]. However, motor recalibration effects have been reported [14] by which participants learn to improve their estimates through training. These may reflect high-level cognition, as opposed to overall calibration.…”