June 2006
Volume 6, Issue 6
Free
Vision Sciences Society Annual Meeting Abstract  |   June 2006
Collision detection and factors affecting “reality” of a virtual environment
Author Affiliations
  • Russell L. Woods
    The Schepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, MA, and Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
  • Lee T. Lichtenstein
    The Schepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, MA
  • Aaron J. Mandel
    The Schepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, MA
  • Eli Peli
    The Schepens Eye Research Institute, Boston, MA, and Department of Ophthalmology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA
Journal of Vision June 2006, Vol.6, 141. doi:10.1167/6.6.141
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Russell L. Woods, Lee T. Lichtenstein, Aaron J. Mandel, Eli Peli; Collision detection and factors affecting “reality” of a virtual environment. Journal of Vision 2006;6(6):141. doi: 10.1167/6.6.141.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose: Factors expected to improve the immersive experience (‘realism’) in a virtual environment (e.g. updating the viewpoint using head position) may affect collision detection performance.

Methods: Participants stood or walked on a treadmill 75cm from 95-degree-wide screen that displayed a textured representation of a ‘shopping mall’ corridor. Participants indicated whether they would collide with human-sized obstacles, that appeared for one second, if they continued on the same path. Perceived safe passing distance and decision quality were compared for: (1) locomotion (standing versus walking at fixed and participant-controlled speeds); (2) viewing eyes (monocular or binocular); (3) viewpoint updating (moving the viewpoint with head position) and (4) viewpoint error (30cm left or right).

Results: When standing, participants had a slightly smaller perceived safe passing distance (p=0.07) and more definite decisions (p=0.01) than when walking. Participant-controlled walking speed, viewing eyes and viewpoint updating had no significant effect on the perceived safe passing distance (p>0.18) or decision quality (p>0.38). Viewpoint error caused subjects to have a non-symmetric perceived safe passing distance (shifted their perceived centerline), with females shifting towards and males shifting away from the incorrect viewpoint (p=0.02).

Conclusions: Attempts to increase realism (walking, viewpoint updating, using one eye with non-stereo display) did not affect collision detection performance. Temporal lag of our headtracker may have degraded performance in the viewpoint-updating condition. The implications of the gender difference in perceived body position due to viewpoint error is not clear.

Woods, R. L. Lichtenstein, L. T. Mandel, A. J. Peli, E. (2006). Collision detection and factors affecting “reality” of a virtual environment [Abstract]. Journal of Vision, 6(6):141, 141a, http://journalofvision.org/6/6/141/, doi:10.1167/6.6.141. [CrossRef]
Footnotes
 Supported by NIH grant EY12890.
×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×