Evaluating joystick control for view rotation in virtual reality with continuous turning, discrete turning, and field-of-view reduction

Head tracking is commonly used in virtual reality applications to allow users to naturally view 3D content using physical head movement, but many applications also support joystick control to allow additional turning. Joystick control is convenient for practical settings where full 360-degree physical rotation is not possible or preferred, such as when the user is lying on a couch or sitting at a desk. Though joystick control provides the benefit of convenience, previous research and development projects have demonstrated joystick-controlled view rotation to have drawbacks of sickness and disorientation compared to more natural physical turning. To combat such issues, researchers have considered various technique configurations such as speed adjustments or reduced field of view, but empirical data is limited on how different design variations for joystick rotation influences sickness and ability to maintain spatial orientation. Our research compares three common joystick rotation techniques: (1) traditional smooth, continuous rotation, (2) continuous rotation with a reduced field of view, and (3) discrete rotation with fixed intervals. In a controlled experiment, participants traveled through a sequence of rooms and were tested on spatial orientation. Results showed no evidence of differences in orientation, but the results of sickness ratings found discrete rotations to be significantly better than field-of-view reduction.

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

[2]  Prabhat,et al.  A Comparative Study of Desktop, Fishtank, and Cave Systems for the Exploration of Volume Rendered Confocal Data Sets , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[3]  Henry Been-Lirn Duh,et al.  Effects of field of view on presence, enjoyment, memory, and simulator sickness in a virtual environment , 2002, Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality 2002.

[4]  Valentina Nisi,et al.  Proceedings of the ACM SIGCHI Annual Symposium on Computer-Human Interaction in Play , 2017 .

[5]  Michael E. McCauley,et al.  Cybersickness: Perception of Self-Motion in Virtual Environments , 1992, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[6]  Eric D. Ragan,et al.  Trade-Offs Related to Travel Techniques and Level of Display Fidelity in Virtual Data-Analysis Environments , 2012, ICAT/EGVE/EuroVR.

[7]  Eric D. Ragan,et al.  Studying the Effects of Stereo, Head Tracking, and Field of Regard on a Small-Scale Spatial Judgment Task , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[8]  Brett D. Jones,et al.  The effects of display fidelity, visual complexity, and task scope on spatial understanding of 3D graphs , 2013, Graphics Interface.

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

[10]  Benjamin Weyers,et al.  Remain seated: towards fully-immersive desktop VR , 2017, 2017 IEEE 3rd Workshop on Everyday Virtual Reality (WEVR).

[11]  Steven K. Feiner,et al.  Combating VR sickness through subtle dynamic field-of-view modification , 2016, 2016 IEEE Symposium on 3D User Interfaces (3DUI).

[12]  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.

[13]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Travel in immersive virtual environments: an evaluation of viewpoint motion control techniques , 1997, Proceedings of IEEE 1997 Annual International Symposium on Virtual Reality.

[14]  Colin Ware,et al.  Exploration and virtual camera control in virtual three dimensional environments , 1990, I3D '90.

[15]  Rajiv V. Dubey,et al.  Point & Teleport Locomotion Technique for Virtual Reality , 2016, CHI PLAY.

[16]  Benjamin Bolte,et al.  The Jumper Metaphor: An Effective Navigation Technique for Immersive Display Setups , 2011 .

[17]  Bernhard E. Riecke,et al.  To move or not to move: can active control and user-driven motion cueing enhance self-motion perception ("vection") in virtual reality? , 2012, SAP.

[18]  Michael Venturino,et al.  Performance and head movements using a helmet-mounted display with different sized fields-of-view , 1990 .

[19]  Eric D. Ragan,et al.  Guided head rotation and amplified head rotation: Evaluating semi-natural travel and viewing techniques in virtual reality , 2017, 2017 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR).

[20]  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.

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

[22]  Robert S. Kennedy,et al.  Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. , 1993 .