Effect of Environment Immersivity on Encoding Strategies of Spatial Tasks

Abstract The main objective of the current project was to examine the effect of different viewing environments on individual's use of spatial frames of references while performing mental rotation task. Twenty five participants were administered a computerized mental rotation task presented in three different viewing environments: two-dimensional computer desktop (2D), three-dimensional large projector screen (3DP), and three-dimensional large projector screen with tracking (3DPT). The participants’ responses were compared to those obtained in fully-immersive virtual environment (VE) offered through the use of head-mounted displays. In 2D condition, the participants encoded the stimuli allocentrically, in relation to a computer screen. This is in contrast to a fully immersive VE, where participants encoded the images egocentrically, in relation to a viewer-centered frame of reference. In 3DP and 3DPT conditions, the participants tended to rely more on egocentric rather than allocentric encoding, although not to the same extent as in fully-immersive VEs. The change in participants’ responses in 3DP and 3DPTconditions, as compared to 2D condition, implies that large screen displays provide higher degree of immersivity than conventional 2D displays. However, in contrast to fully immersive VEs, large screen displays are insufficient to ensure the dominant use of a viewer-centered frame of reference.

[1]  R. Seurinck,et al.  Does egocentric mental rotation elicit sex differences? , 2004, NeuroImage.

[2]  J. Collomosse,et al.  The effect of explicitly varying the proportion of “same” and “different” responses on sex differences in the Shepard and Metzler mental rotation task , 2010 .

[3]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional Objects , 1971, Science.

[4]  M. Linn,et al.  Emergence and characterization of sex differences in spatial ability: a meta-analysis. , 1985, Child development.

[5]  L M Parsons,et al.  Visual discrimination of abstract mirror-reflected three-dimensional objects at many orientations , 1987, Perception & psychophysics.

[6]  D. Kimura Sex and cognition , 1999 .

[7]  Jonathan E. Roberts,et al.  Sex Differences on a Mental Rotation Task: Variations in Electroencephalogram Hemispheric Activation Between Children and College Students , 2000, Developmental neuropsychology.

[8]  R. Shepard,et al.  Mental Images and Their Transformations , 1982 .

[9]  S. Golaszewski,et al.  Sex differences in brain activation pattern during a visuospatial cognitive task: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study in healthy volunteers , 2003, Neuroscience Letters.

[10]  K. Kucian,et al.  Gender differences in brain activation patterns during mental rotation and number related cognitive tasks , 2005 .

[11]  Desney S. Tan,et al.  Physically large displays improve performance on spatial tasks , 2006, TCHI.

[12]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Mental spatial transformations of objects and perspective , 2001, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[13]  J. Galen Buckwalter,et al.  Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial rotation in a virtual environment , 2004, Neuropsychologia.

[14]  Dennis Proffitt,et al.  Large displays enhance spatial knowledge of a virtual environment , 2006, APGV '06.

[15]  John E. Stewart,et al.  Use of Virtual Environments for the Acquisition of Spatial Knowledge: Comparison Among Different , 1999 .

[16]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Virtual Reality: How Much Immersion Is Enough? , 2007, Computer.

[17]  Susan D. Voyer,et al.  Magnitude of sex differences in spatial abilities: a meta-analysis and consideration of critical variables. , 1995, Psychological bulletin.

[18]  Rupali P. Dhond,et al.  Understanding Immersivity: Image Generation and Transformation Processes in 3D Immersive Environments , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[19]  Crystal L. Hoyt,et al.  Immersive Virtual Environment Technology as a Methodological Tool for Social Psychology , 2002 .