This study investigated how display parameters influence humans’ ability to control simulated egorotations from optic flow. The literature on visual turn perception reports contradictory data, which might be partly due to the different display devices used in these studies. In this study, we aimed at disentangling the influence of display devices, screen curvature, and field of view (FOV) on the ability to control simulated ego-rotations solely from visual information. In Experiment 1, FOV and display device (projection screen vs. head-mounted display (HMD)) was manipulated. In Experiment 2, screen curvature and FOV were varied. Subjects’ task was to perform visually simulated self-rotations with target angles between 45 and 270◦. Stimuli consisted of limited lifetime dots on a dark background, and subjects used a joystick to control the turning angle of the visual stimulus. In Experiment 1, performance was tested in a within-subject design, using a curved projection screen (FOV 84◦×63◦), a HMD (40◦×30◦), and blinders (40◦×30◦) that restricted the FOV on the screen. Performance was best with the screen (gain factor 0.77) and worst with the HMD (gain 0.57). We found a significant difference between blinders (gain 0.73) and HMD, which indicates that different display devices can influence ego-motion perception differentially, even if the physical FOVs are equal. In Experiment 2, screen curvature was found to influence the perception of ego-rotations: At identical FOVs of 84◦, participants undershot target angles on the curved screen (gain 0.84), while they overshot target angles on the flat screen (gain 1.08). Perceptual mechanisms that may underlie these results will be discussed. We conclude the following: First, differences between display devices (HMD vs. curved projection screen) are more critical than the FOV for the perception of ego-rotations, with projection screens being better than HMDs. Second, screen curvature significantly influences performance for visually simulated egorotations: Compared to the flat screen, the curved screen enhanced the perception of ego-rotations. These findings have relevant implications for the design of motion simulators.
[1]
William H Warren,et al.
Path Integration from Optic Flow and Body Senses in a Homing Task
,
2002,
Perception.
[2]
Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.
Visual Homing Is Possible Without Landmarks: A Path Integration Study in Virtual Reality
,
2002,
Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.
[3]
Johannes Dichgans,et al.
Perceived distance and the perceived speed of self-motion: Linear vs. angular velocity?
,
1975
.
[4]
Peter J. Werkhoven,et al.
Calibrating Visual Path Integration in VEs
,
2001,
Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.
[5]
P Péruch,et al.
Homing in Virtual Environments: Effects of Field of View and Path Layout
,
1997,
Perception.
[6]
F. Bremmer,et al.
The use of optical velocities for distance discrimination and reproduction during visually simulated self motion
,
1999,
Experimental Brain Research.
[7]
Peter J. Werkhoven,et al.
The Effects of Proprioceptive and Visual Feedback on Geographical Orientation in Virtual Environments
,
1999,
Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.
[8]
Bernhard E. Riecke.
Untersuchung des menschlichen Navigationsverhaltens anhand von Heimfindeexperimenten in virtuellen Umgebungen
,
1998
.