Effect of Virtual Human Gaze Behaviour During an Orthogonal Collision Avoidance Walking Task

This paper presents a study performed in virtual reality on the effect of gaze interception during collision avoidance between two walkers. In such a situation, mutual gaze can be considered as a form of nonverbal communication. Additionally, gaze is believed to detail future path intentions and to be part of the nonverbal negotiation to achieve avoidance collaboratively. We considered an avoidance task between a real subject and a virtual human character and studied the influence of the character's gaze direction on the avoidance behaviour of the participant. Virtual reality provided an accurate control of the situation: seventeen participants were immersed in a virtual environment, instructed to navigate across a virtual space using a joystick and to avoid a virtual character that would appear from either side. The character would either gaze or not towards the participant. Further, the character would either perform or not a reciprocal adaptation of its trajectory to avoid a potential collision with the participant. The findings of this paper were that during an orthogonal collision avoidance task, gaze behaviour did not influence the collision avoidance behaviour of the participants. Further, the addition of reciprocal collision avoidance with gaze did not modify the collision behaviour of participants. These results suggest that for the duration of interaction in such a task, body motion cues were sufficient for coordination and regulation. We discuss the possible exploitation of these results to improve the design of virtual characters for populated virtual environments and user interaction.

[1]  Anne-Hélène Olivier,et al.  Walking with Virtual People: Evaluation of Locomotion Interfaces in Dynamic Environments , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[2]  J. Loomis,et al.  Interpersonal Distance in Immersive Virtual Environments , 2003, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[3]  Julien Pettré,et al.  Going Through, Going Around: A Study on Individual Avoidance of Groups , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[4]  Dinesh Manocha,et al.  PedVR: simulating gaze-based interactions between a real user and virtual crowds , 2016, VRST.

[5]  M. Turk,et al.  Transformed social interaction, augmented gaze, and social influence in immersive virtual environments , 2005 .

[6]  S. Pannasch,et al.  Social communication with virtual agents: The effects of body and gaze direction on attention and emotional responding in human observers. , 2015, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[7]  J. Hermsdörfer,et al.  Influence of person- and situation-specific characteristics on collision avoidance behavior in human locomotion. , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  C. Kleinke Gaze and eye contact: a research review. , 1986, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  J. Brock,et al.  Human agency beliefs influence behaviour during virtual social interactions , 2017, PeerJ.

[10]  J. Hietanen,et al.  I'll Walk This Way: Eyes Reveal the Direction of Locomotion and Make Passersby Look and Go the Other Way , 2009, Psychological science.

[11]  Anne-Hélène Olivier,et al.  Collision Avoidance Behavior between Walkers: Global and Local Motion Cues , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[12]  Stefan Glasauer,et al.  Adjustments of Speed and Path when Avoiding Collisions with Another Pedestrian , 2014, PloS one.

[13]  Dinesh Manocha,et al.  Reciprocal n-Body Collision Avoidance , 2011, ISRR.

[14]  Nadim Joni Shah,et al.  Duration matters: Dissociating neural correlates of detection and evaluation of social gaze , 2009, NeuroImage.

[15]  James L. Croft,et al.  Watch Where You're Going? Interferer Velocity and Visual Behavior Predicts Avoidance Strategy During Pedestrian Encounters , 2018, Journal of motor behavior.

[16]  Julien Pettré,et al.  Collision avoidance between two walkers: role-dependent strategies. , 2013, Gait & posture.

[17]  K. Vogeley,et al.  From gaze cueing to dual eye-tracking: Novel approaches to investigate the neural correlates of gaze in social interaction , 2013, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[18]  J. Pettré,et al.  Minimal predicted distance: a common metric for collision avoidance during pairwise interactions between walkers. , 2012, Gait & posture.

[19]  Richard W. Bohannon Comfortable and maximum walking speed of adults aged 20-79 years: reference values and determinants. , 1997, Age and ageing.

[20]  Scott E. Hudson,et al.  Towards Robot Autonomy in Group Conversations: Understanding the Effects of Body Orientation and Gaze , 2017, 2017 12th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI.

[21]  G. McCarthy,et al.  When Strangers Pass , 2004, Psychological science.

[22]  G. Rees Statistical Parametric Mapping , 2004, Practical Neurology.

[23]  Mark H. Johnson,et al.  The eye contact effect: mechanisms and development , 2009, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[24]  J. Hietanen,et al.  There is more to eye contact than meets the eye , 2015, Cognition.

[25]  Daniel Thalmann,et al.  Simulating gaze attention behaviors for crowds , 2009, Comput. Animat. Virtual Worlds.

[26]  Maud Marchal,et al.  Kinematic Evaluation of Virtual Walking Trajectories , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[27]  Bradford J McFadyen,et al.  Characteristics of personal space during obstacle circumvention in physical and virtual environments. , 2008, Gait & posture.

[28]  Olivier Stasse,et al.  How do walkers avoid a mobile robot crossing their way? , 2016, Gait & posture.