An Investigation of Visual Cues used to Create and Support Frames of Reference and Visual Search Tasks in Desktop Virtual Environments

Visual depth cues are combined to produce the essential depth and dimensionality of Desktop Virtual Environments (DVEs). This study discusses DVEs in terms of the visual depth cues that create and support perception of frames of references and accomplishment of visual search tasks. This paper presents the results of an investigation that identifies the effects of the experimental stimuli positions and visual depth cues: luminance, texture, relative height and motion parallax on precise depth judgements made within a DVE. Results indicate that the experimental stimuli positions significantly affect precise depth judgements, texture is only significantly effective for certain conditions, and motion parallax, in line with previous results, is inconclusive to determine depth judgement accuracy for egocentrically viewed DVEs. Results also show that exocentric views, incorporating relative height and motion parallax visual cues, are effective for precise depth judgements made in DVEs. The results help us to understand the effects of certain visual depth cues to support the perception of frames of references and precise depth judgements, suggesting that the visual depth cues employed to create frames of references in DVEs may influence how effectively precise depth judgements are undertaken.

[1]  Harvey S. Smallman,et al.  The When and How of Using 2-D and 3-D Displays for Operational Tasks , 2000 .

[2]  V. S. Ramachandran,et al.  Perception of shape from shading , 1988, Nature.

[3]  G. Sperling,et al.  Tradeoffs between stereopsis and proximity luminance covariance as determinants of perceived 3D structure , 1986, Vision Research.

[4]  Ian P. Howard,et al.  Spatial vision within egocentric and exocentric frames of reference , 1991 .

[5]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[6]  Roy A. Ruddle,et al.  Navigating Large-Scale Desk-Top Virtual Buildings: Effects of Orientation Aids and Familiarity , 1998, Presence.

[7]  Steven Todd,et al.  Three-Dimensional Displays: Perception, Implementation, and Applications , 1989 .

[8]  Donald P. Greenberg,et al.  Perceiving spatial relationships in computer-generated images , 1992, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[9]  長田 昌次郎,et al.  How to Reinforce Perception of Depth in Single Two-Dimensional Pictures , 1986 .

[10]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  Relationship between monocular and binocular depth cues for judgements of spatial information and spatial instrument design , 1995 .

[11]  Larry F. Hodges,et al.  The Perception of Distance in Simulated Visual Displays:A Comparison of the Effectiveness and Accuracy of Multiple Depth Cues Across Viewing Distances , 1997, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[12]  Arnulf Remote,et al.  PICTORIAL COMMUNICATION IN VIRTUAL AND REAL ENVIRONMENTS , 1992 .

[13]  Geoffrey S. Hubona,et al.  The effects of motion and stereopsis on three-dimensional visualization , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[14]  J. Cutting,et al.  Three Gradients and the Perception of Flat and Curved Surfaces , 1984 .

[15]  R. Jacobs,et al.  Experience-dependent integration of texture and motion cues to depth , 1999, Vision Research.

[16]  P R DeLucia,et al.  Pictorial and motion-based information for depth perception. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  Geoffrey S. Hubona,et al.  The relative contributions of stereo, lighting, and background scenes in promoting 3D depth visualization , 1999, TCHI.

[18]  J. Cutting,et al.  Three gradients and the perception of flat and curved surfaces. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[19]  S. Ellis.  Pictorial communication in virtual and real environments , 1991 .

[20]  Don E. Eyles.  A computer graphics system for visualizing spacecraft in orbit , 1991 .

[21]  James E. Cutting,et al.  Chapter 3 – Perceiving Layout and Knowing Distances: The Integration, Relative Potency, and Contextual Use of Different Information about Depth* , 1995 .

[22]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Tactical Displays for Combat Awareness: An Examination of Dimensionality and Frame of Reference Concepts and the Application of Cognitive Engineering , 2000 .

[23]  Andrew Glennerster,et al.  The task-dependent use of binocular disparity and motion parallax information , 2000, Vision Research.

[24]  James E. Cutting,et al.  Perceiving Layout and Knowing Distances , 1995 .

[25]  M. Landy,et al.  Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion , 1995, Vision Research.

[26]  S J Westerman,et al.  Individual differences in the use of depth cues: implications for computer- and video-based tasks. , 1998, Acta psychologica.

[27]  James E. Cutting,et al.  HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING AND HUMAN VISION I , 2002 .