Evaluation of factors affecting distance perception in immersive virtual environments during virtual visits of houses

ABSTRACT

Virtual reality (VR) is increasingly used as a validation tool of architectural projects. One of the major problems of immersive virtual visits, in this context, is the phenomenon well known of distance compression. Most studies that have investigated this problem of perception have focused on factors related to display devices such as field of view, motion parallax, etc. We propose a study of several factors that may affect distance perception in VR which have not yet been the subject of thorough research.

We present the results of an experiment aimed to study the impact of three factors on the perception of distances and volumes: 1) the cognitive profile 2) the furnishing of houses and 3) the speed of navigation. The results of the experiment shown that these three factors influence the perception of distances and volumes as well as the immersion. The following recommendations can be highlighted. First, a slow navigation speed promotes the immersion. Further, it facilitates the task of distance estimation and leads to good estimations. Second, virtual visits are better in furnished houses. They offer a perception of distances similar to the case of unfurnished houses while providing a better understanding of the space.

References

1. Argelaguet, F. Adaptive navigation in virtual environments. In IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (2014).
2. Arns, L., and Cruz-Neira, C. Effects of physical and virtual rotations and display device on users of an architectural walkthrough. In Proceedings of the 2004 ACM SIGGRAPH International Conference on Virtual Reality Continuum and Its Applications in Industry, ACM (2004), 104--111.
3. Bruder, G., Argelaguet Sanz, F., Olivier, A.-H., and Lécuyer, A. Distance Estimation in Large Immersive Projection Systems, Revisited. In IEEE Virtual Reality (Arles, France, Mar. 2015).
4. Campos, J., Butler, J., and Bülthoff, H. Multisensory integration in the estimation of walked distances. Experimental Brain Research 218, 4 (2012), 551--565.
5. Chislett, V., and Chapman, A. Vak learning styles self-assessment questionnaire, 2005.
6. Drettakis, G., Roussou, M., Reche, A., and Tsingos, N. Design and evaluation of a real-world virtual environment for architecture and urban planning. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 16, 3 (2007), 318--332.
7. Dunston, P., Arns, L., Mcglothlin, J., Lasker, G., and Kushner, A. An immersive virtual reality mock-up for design review of hospital rooms. 7th International Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality (2007), 22--23.
8. Fink, P. W., Foo, P. S., and Warren, W. H. Obstacle avoidance during walking in real and virtual environments. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 4, 1 (2007).
9. Frenz, H., and Lappe, M. Absolute travel distance from optic flow. Vision Research 45, 13 (2005), 1679--1692.
10. Frenz, H., Lappe, M., Kolesnik, M., and Bührmann, T. Estimation of travel distance from visual motion in virtual environments. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 4, 1 (2007).
11. Grechkin, T. Y., Nguyen, T. D., Plumert, J. M., Cremer, J. F., and Kearney, J. K. How does presentation method and measurement protocol affect distance estimation in real and virtual environments? ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 7, 4 (2010), 26:1--26:18.
12. Guan, Y., and Li, C.-T. A robust speed-invariant gait recognition system for walker and runner identification. In in Proc. the 6th IAPR International Conference on Biometrics (ICB'13), IAPR (2013), 1--8.
13. Henry, D., and Furness, T. Spatial perception in virtual environments: Evaluating an architectural application. In Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium, VRAIS '93, IEEE Computer Society (1993), 33--40.
14. Interrante, V., Ries, B., and Anderson, L. Distance perception in immersive virtual environments, revisited. In Virtual Reality Conference, 2006, IEEE Computer Society (2006), 3--10.
15. Kelly, J. W., Hammel, W. W., Siegel, Z. D., and Sjolund, L. A. Recalibration of perceived distance in virtual environments occurs rapidly and transfers asymmetrically across scale. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics 20, 4 (2014), 588--595.
16. Kennedy, R. S., Lane, N. E., Berbaum, K. S., and Lilienthal, M. G. Simulator sickness questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 3 (1993), 203--220.
17. Lappin, J., Shelton, A., and Rieser, J. Environmental context influences visually perceived distance. Perception and Psychophysics 68, 4 (2006), 571--581.
18. Loomis, J., and Knapp, J. Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. Virtual and Adaptive Environments: Applications, Implications, and Human Performance Issues (2003).
19. Majumdar, T., Fischer, M. A., and Schwegler, B. R. Conceptual design review with a virtual reality mock-up model. Building on IT: Joint International Conference on Computing and Decision Making in Civil and Building Engineering 17, 3 (2006), 2902--2911.
20. Murgia, A., and Sharkey, P. Estimation of distances in virtual environments using size constancy. International Journal of Virtual Reality 8, 1 (2009), 67--74.
21. Naceri, A., and Chellali, R. The effect of isolated disparity on depth perception in real and virtual environments. In Virtual Reality Short Papers and Posters (VRW), 2012 IEEE (2012), 107--108.
22. Palmisano, S. Consistent stereoscopic information increases the perceived speed of vection in depth. Perception 31 (2002), 463--480.
23. Phillips, L., Interrante, V., Kaeding, M., Ries, B., and Anderson, L. Correlations between physiological response, gait, personality, and presence in immersive virtual environments. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 21, 2 (2012), 119--141.
24. Plumert, J. M., Kearney, J. K., Cremer, J. F., and Recker, K. Distance perception in real and virtual environments. ACM Trans. Appl. Percept. 2, 3 (2005), 216--233.
25. Richardson, A. R., and Waller, D. Interaction with an immersive virtual environment corrects users' distance estimates. Human Factors 49, 3 (2007), 507--517.
26. Sinai, M. J., Ooi, T. L., and He, Z. J. Terrain influences the accurate judgement of distance. Nature 395 (1998), 497--500.
27. Wahlström, M., Aittala, M., Kotilainen, H., Yli-Karhu, T., Porkka, J., and Nykänen, E. Cave for collaborative patient room design: analysis with end-user opinion contrasting method. Virtual Reality 14, 3 (2010), 197--211.
28. Waller, D., and Richardson, A. R. Correcting distance estimates by interacting with immersive virtual environments: Effects of task and available sensory information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 14, 1 (2008), 61--72.
29. Witmer, B. G., and Singer, M. J. Measuring presence in virtual environments: A presence questionnaire. Presence: Teleoper. Virtual Environ. 7, 3 (1998), 225--240.
30. Wu, B., Ooi, T. L., and He, Z. J. Perceiving distance accurately by a directional process of integrating ground information. Nature 428 (2004), 73--77.
31. Yerrapathruni, S., Messner, J., Baratta, A., and Horman, M. Using 4d cad and immersive virtual environments to improve construction planning. Conference on Construction Applications of Virtual Reality (2003), 179--192.
32. Zikic, N. Evaluating Relative Impact of VR Components Screen size, Stereoscopy and Field of View on Spatial Comprehension and Presence in Architecture. PhD thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA, 2007.

Index Terms

• Computing methodologies

  • Computer graphics

    • Graphics systems and interfaces

      • Virtual reality

• Human-centered computing

  • Human computer interaction (HCI)

    • Interaction paradigms

      • Mixed / augmented reality

      • Virtual reality