The benefits of using a walking interface to navigate virtual environments

Navigation is the most common interactive task performed in three-dimensional virtual environments (VEs), but it is also a task that users often find difficult. We investigated how body-based information about the translational and rotational components of movement helped participants to perform a navigational search task (finding targets hidden inside boxes in a room-sized space). When participants physically walked around the VE while viewing it on a head-mounted display (HMD), they then performed 90% of trials perfectly, comparable to participants who had performed an equivalent task in the real world during a previous study. By contrast, participants performed less than 50% of trials perfectly if they used a tethered HMD (move by physically turning but pressing a button to translate) or a desktop display (no body-based information). This is the most complex navigational task in which a real-world level of performance has been achieved in a VE. Behavioral data indicates that both translational and rotational body-based information are required to accurately update one's position during navigation, and participants who walked tended to avoid obstacles, even though collision detection was not implemented and feedback not provided. A walking interface would bring immediate benefits to a number of VE applications.

[1]  Hiroo Iwata,et al.  CirculaFloor: A Locomotion Interface Using Circulation of Movable Tiles , 2005, VR.

[2]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  The effect of trails on first-time and subsequent navigation in a virtual environment , 2005, IEEE Proceedings. VR 2005. Virtual Reality, 2005..

[3]  Simon Lessels,et al.  For Efficient Navigational Search, Humans Require Full Physical Movement, but Not a Rich Visual Scene , 2006, Psychological science.

[4]  J. Rieser Access to Knowledge of Spatial Structure at Novel Points of Observation , 1989 .

[5]  Stuart C. Grant,et al.  Contributions of Proprioception to Navigation in Virtual Environments , 1998, Hum. Factors.

[6]  Roy A. Ruddle Navigation: am I really lost or virtually there? , 2001 .

[7]  Jan J. Koenderink,et al.  Editorial: Walking in real and virtual environments , 2007, TAP.

[8]  Sharif Razzaque,et al.  Comparing VE locomotion interfaces , 2005, IEEE Proceedings. VR 2005. Virtual Reality, 2005..

[9]  Ivan Poupyrev,et al.  3D User Interfaces: Theory and Practice , 2004 .

[10]  Peter J. Werkhoven,et al.  The Effects of Proprioceptive and Visual Feedback on Geographical Orientation in Virtual Environments , 1999, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[11]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  Effects of proprioceptive feedback and environmental characteristics on spatial learning in virtual environments , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[12]  Jack M. Loomis,et al.  Locomotion Mode Affects the Updating of Objects Encountered During Travel: The Contribution of Vestibular and Proprioceptive Inputs to Path Integration , 1998, Presence.

[13]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  Movement Around Real and Virtual Cluttered Environments , 2005, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[14]  Desney S. Tan,et al.  Women take a wider view , 2002, CHI.

[15]  Mary C. Whitton,et al.  Walking > walking-in-place > flying, in virtual environments , 1999, SIGGRAPH.

[16]  Wallace J. Sadowski,et al.  VE-Based Training Strategies for Acquiring Survey Knowledge , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[17]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Visual Homing Is Possible Without Landmarks: A Path Integration Study in Virtual Reality , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[18]  J. Rieser Access to knowledge of spatial structure at novel points of observation. , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[19]  Frederick P. Brooks,et al.  Six Generations of Building Walkthrough: Final Technical Report to the National Science Foundation , 1992 .

[20]  Alessandro De Luca,et al.  Acceleration-level control of the CyberCarpet , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[21]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  Changes in Navigational Behaviour Produced by a Wide Field of View and a High Fidelity Visual Scene , 2004, EGVE.

[22]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  Movement in Cluttered Virtual Environments , 2001, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[23]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  Neural Processing of Spatial Information: What We Know about Place Cells and What They Can Tell Us about Presence , 2006, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[24]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  Ignoring perfect knowledge in-the-world for imperfect knowledge in-the-head , 2001, CHI.

[25]  Mary K. Kaiser,et al.  Perceived Orientation in Physical and Virtual Environments: Changes in Perceived Orientation as a Function of Idiothetic Information Available , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[26]  C C Presson,et al.  Updating after Rotational and Translational Body Movements: Coordinate Structure of Perspective Space , 1994, Perception.

[27]  Dennis Proffitt,et al.  Quantifying immersion in virtual reality , 1997, SIGGRAPH.

[28]  Haruo Noma,et al.  Simulating side slopes on locomotion interfaces using torso forces , 2003, 11th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, 2003. HAPTICS 2003. Proceedings..

[29]  Andrew P. Duchon,et al.  Do Humans Integrate Routes Into a Cognitive Map? Map- Versus Landmark-Based Navigation of Novel Shortcuts , 2005 .

[30]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Spatial updating in real and virtual environments: contribution and interaction of visual and vestibular cues , 2004, APGV '04.

[31]  Patricia S. Denbrook,et al.  Virtual Locomotion: Walking in Place through Virtual Environments , 1999, Presence.

[32]  Sharif Razzaque,et al.  Redirected Walking in Place , 2002, EGVE.

[33]  Christian Wallraven,et al.  Proceedings of the 4th symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualization , 2007, APGV.

[34]  A RuddleRoy,et al.  The benefits of using a walking interface to navigate virtual environments , 2009 .

[35]  D Waller,et al.  Individual differences in spatial learning from computer-simulated environments. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[36]  John R. Wilson,et al.  Virtual Reality-Induced Symptoms and Effects (VRISE) , 1999, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[37]  John H. Bailey,et al.  Virtual spaces and real world places: transfer of route knowledge , 1996, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[38]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  Navigating Large-Scale Virtual Environments: What Differences Occur Between Helmet-Mounted and Desk-Top Displays? , 1999, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[39]  William H Warren,et al.  Do humans integrate routes into a cognitive map? Map- versus landmark-based navigation of novel shortcuts. , 2010, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[40]  Patrick Péruch,et al.  Direction and distance deficits in path integration after unilateral vestibular loss depend on task complexity. , 2005, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[41]  Earl Hunt,et al.  The Transfer of Spatial Knowledge in Virtual Environment Training , 1998, Presence.

[42]  Vladimir I. Levenshtein,et al.  Binary codes capable of correcting deletions, insertions, and reversals , 1965 .

[43]  J. Loomis,et al.  Body-based senses enhance knowledge of directions in large-scale environments , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[44]  David A. Winter,et al.  Biomechanics and Motor Control of Human Movement , 1990 .

[45]  Sabarish V. Babu,et al.  Comparison of path visualizations and cognitive measures relative to travel technique in a virtual environment , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[46]  Dylan M. Jones,et al.  Navigating Buildings in "Desk-Top" Virtual Environments: Experimental Investigations Using Extended Navigational Experience , 1997 .

[47]  Hanspeter A. Mallot,et al.  The Role of Global and Local Landmarks in Virtual Environment Navigation , 2000, Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ..

[48]  Sarah S. Chance,et al.  Spatial Updating of Self-Position and Orientation During Real, Imagined, and Virtual Locomotion , 1998 .

[49]  Rudy Darken,et al.  The omni-directional treadmill: a locomotion device for virtual worlds , 1997, UIST '97.

[50]  G. Michel,et al.  Restricting the Field of View: Perceptual and Performance Effects , 1990, Perceptual and motor skills.

[51]  John M. Hollerbach,et al.  Effect of Turning Strategy on Maneuvering Ability Using the Treadport Locomotion Interface , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[52]  Bob G. Witmer,et al.  Judging Perceived and Traversed Distance in Virtual Environments , 1998, Presence.

[53]  Mel Slater,et al.  Taking steps: the influence of a walking technique on presence in virtual reality , 1995, TCHI.

[54]  K. Gegenfurtner,et al.  Design Issues in Gaze Guidance Under review with ACM Transactions on Computer Human Interaction , 2009 .