Vision for Performance in Virtual Environments: The Role of Feedback Timing

This work explores how people use visual feedback when performing simple reach-to-grasp movements in a tabletop virtual environment. In particular we investigated whether visual feedback is required for the entire reach or whether minimal feedback can be effectively used. Twelve participants performed reach-to-grasp movements toward targets at two locations. Visual feedback about the index finger and thumb was provided in four conditions: vision available throughout the movement, vision available up to peak wrist velocity, vision available until movement initiation, or vision absent throughout the movement. It was hypothesized that vision available until movement onset would be an advantage over a no vision situation yet not attain the performance observed when vision was available up to peak velocity. Results indicated that movement time was longest in the no vision condition but similar for the three conditions where vision was available. However, deceleration time and peak aperture measures suggest grasping is more difficult when vision is not available for at least the first third of the movement. These results suggest that designers of virtual environments can manipulate the availability of visual feedback of one's hand without compromising interactivity. This may be applied, for example, when detailed rendering of other aspects of the environmental layout is more important, when motion lag is a problem or when hand/object concealment is an issue.

[1]  S. Vogt,et al.  Vision of the hand and environmental context in human prehension , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[2]  James R. Lackner,et al.  Circumventing Side Effects of Immersive Virtual Environments , 1997, HCI.

[3]  Andrea H. Mason,et al.  An experimental study on the role of graphical information about hand movement when interacting with objects in virtual reality environments , 2007, Interact. Comput..

[4]  Bernard D. Adelstein,et al.  Discriminability of Prediction Artifacts in a Time-Delayed Virtual Environment , 2000 .

[5]  Michel Desmurget,et al.  The effect of viewing the static hand prior to movement onset on pointing kinematics and variability , 1994, Experimental Brain Research.

[6]  Andrea H. Mason,et al.  The effects of visual information about self-movement on grasp forces when receiving objects in an augmented environment , 2002, Proceedings 10th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems. HAPTICS 2002.

[7]  V. Gullapalli,et al.  Visual Information and Object Size in the Control of Reaching. , 1996, Journal of motor behavior.

[8]  Christine L. MacKenzie,et al.  Physical versus virtual pointing , 1996, CHI.

[9]  C. Prablanc,et al.  Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement , 1986, Nature.

[10]  A. Wing,et al.  Grasp size and accuracy of approach in reaching. , 1986, Journal of motor behavior.

[11]  Les G. Carlton,et al.  Chapter 1 Visual Processing Time and the Control of Movement , 1992 .

[12]  M. Goodale,et al.  Grasping versus pointing and the differential use of visual feedback , 1993 .

[13]  Yanqing Wang,et al.  The role of contextual haptic and visual constraints on object manipulation in virtual environments , 2000, CHI.

[14]  D. Elliott,et al.  The influence of visual target and limb information on manual aiming. , 1988, Canadian journal of psychology.

[15]  Andrew N. Healey,et al.  Speculation on the Neuropsychology of Teleoperation: Implications for Presence Research and Minimally Invasive Surgery , 2008, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[16]  Mark Billinghurst,et al.  Interaction With Partially Transparent Hands And Objects , 2005, AUIC.

[17]  D Elliott,et al.  Optimizing the use of Vision in Manual Aiming: The Role of Practice , 1995, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[18]  Michael A. Khan,et al.  The Effect of Practice on Component Submovements is Dependent on the Availability of Visual Feedback , 2000, Journal of motor behavior.

[19]  Robert S. Allison,et al.  Tolerance of temporal delay in virtual environments , 2001, Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality 2001.

[20]  Robert Sessions Woodworth,et al.  THE ACCURACY OF VOLUNTARY MOVEMENT , 1899 .

[21]  P. Fitts,et al.  INFORMATION CAPACITY OF DISCRETE MOTOR RESPONSES. , 1964, Journal of experimental psychology.

[22]  S. Chieffi,et al.  The role of proprioception in the control of prehension movements: a kinematic study in a peripherally deafferented patient and in normal subjects , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[23]  R. Thouless Experimental Psychology , 1939, Nature.

[24]  Colin Ware,et al.  Frames of reference in virtual object rotation , 2004, APGV '04.

[25]  W. Helsen,et al.  Temporal and spatial coupling of point of gaze and hand movements in aiming. , 1998, Journal of motor behavior.

[26]  Christine L. MacKenzie,et al.  Pointing on a computer display , 1995, CHI 95 Conference Companion.

[27]  Frank Biocca,et al.  Virtual Eyes Can Rearrange Your Body: Adaptation to Visual Displacement in See-Through, Head-Mounted Displays , 1998, Presence.

[28]  Andrea H. Mason,et al.  Reaching movements to augmented and graphic objects in virtual environments , 2001, CHI.

[29]  Ravin Balakrishnan,et al.  Reaching for objects in VR displays: lag and frame rate , 1994, TCHI.

[30]  Matthew Heath,et al.  The effect of a pictorial illusion on closed-loop and open-loop prehension , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[31]  D. Elliott,et al.  Visual regulation of manual aiming , 1993 .

[32]  B. Hamber Publications , 1998, Weed Technology.

[33]  Carole Ferrel,et al.  Contrôle sensori-moteur en situation de téléopération : données théoriques et perspectives ergonomiques , 2002 .

[34]  Christine L. MacKenzie,et al.  The Grasping Hand , 2011, The Grasping Hand.

[35]  Andrea H. Mason,et al.  The Role of Graphical Feedback About Self-Movement when Receiving Objects in an Augmented Environment , 2004, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[36]  Accepted April,et al.  Factors affecting higher-order movement planning: a kinematic analysis of human prehension , 1991 .

[37]  I. Scott MacKenzie,et al.  Lag as a determinant of human performance in interactive systems , 1993, INTERCHI.