Subjective responses to simulated and real environments : a comparison

In order to assess the validity of computer-generated environment simulations, an empirical field study was conducted. First a computer model of a real urban park environment was developed and used to produce both daylight and night-time animations of a 3 min walk into and through the park. The level of visual detail is high with all trees, buildings and hard surfaces correctly textured. Moving vehicles are also included. Sounds recorded on-site along the selected path were dubbed onto the animations and recorded on videotape. Then an elaborated questionnaire was constructed which measures respondents’ cognitive and affective reactions to the presented environment, including impressions of the area, content retention and comprehension, and their evaluation of the simulations’ realism. Four groups of participants saw the animations and were also taken for a walk in the real environment, either by day or night; for half of them the order of simulation and reality was reversed. The results show that even detailed and time-consuming computer simulations do not necessarily generate the same responses as the corresponding real environment. However, differences between day and night conditions are mostly the same in the simulated as in the real environment, and the realism ratings of the viewers were generally encouraging. The findings elucidate where further development and evaluation are warranted. © 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

[1]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Assessing the Visual Impact of Development Proposals: The Validity of Computer Simulations , 1989, Landscape Journal.

[2]  Thomas C. Brown,et al.  Is motion more important than it sounds?: The medium of presentation in environment perception research , 1993 .

[3]  Nickolaus R. Feimer,et al.  The prediction of scenic beauty from landscape content and composition , 1984 .

[4]  Heinrich H. Bülthoff,et al.  Navigating through a virtual city: Using virtual reality technology to study human action and perception , 1998, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[5]  T. Daniel,et al.  REPRESENTATIONAL VALIDITY OF LANDSCAPE VISUALIZATIONS: THE EFFECTS OF GRAPHICAL REALISM ON PERCEIVED SCENIC BEAUTY OF FOREST VISTAS , 2001 .

[6]  Peter Suedfeld,et al.  Perceived safety from crime in the urban environment , 1993 .

[7]  R. B. Hull,et al.  Validity of photo-based scenic beauty judgments , 1992 .

[8]  John Decker The Validation of Computer Simulations for Design Guideline Dispute Resolution , 1994 .

[9]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Integrating technologies for visual resource management , 1991 .

[10]  T. Gärling,et al.  Environmental Perception and Cognition , 1989 .

[11]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  The evaluative image of the city , 1997 .

[12]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Subjective responses to computer simulations of urban environments , 2002 .

[13]  R. Kaplan,et al.  The Experience of Nature: A Psychological Perspective , 1989 .

[14]  Marino Bonaiuto,et al.  MULTIDIMENSIONAL PERCEPTION OF RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT QUALITY AND NEIGHBOURHOOD ATTACHMENT IN THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT , 1999 .

[15]  Al Globus,et al.  Evaluation of visualization software , 1995, COMG.

[16]  R. Gifford Environmental Psychology: Principles and Practice , 1987 .

[17]  Colin Clipson Simulation for Planning and Design , 1993 .

[18]  Susan M Pietsch Computer Visualisation in the Design Control of Urban Environments: A Literature Review , 2000 .

[19]  D. Canter,et al.  PICTURE OR PLACE? A MULTIPLE SORTING STUDY OF LANDSCAPE☆ , 1997 .

[20]  Richard Smardon,et al.  Perception and aesthetics of the urban environment: Review of the role of vegetation , 1988 .

[21]  Roderick J. Lawrence,et al.  Simulation and Citizen Participation , 1993 .

[22]  Kevin Lynch,et al.  The Image of the City , 1960 .

[23]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  Environmental aesthetics : theory, research, and applications , 1988 .

[24]  Kyu Shik Oh,et al.  A perceptual evaluation of computer-based landscape simulations , 1994 .

[25]  T. R. Herzog,et al.  Tranquility and danger in urban and natural settings , 2000 .

[26]  Helmut Haase,et al.  Doing it right: psychological tests to ensure the quality of scientific visualization , 1996 .

[27]  A. Stamps Use of Photographs to Simulate Environments: A Meta-Analysis , 1990 .

[28]  J. L. Fridley,et al.  The validity of computer-generated graphic images of forest landscape , 1995 .

[29]  Ervin H. Zube,et al.  Landscape perception: Research, application and theory , 1982 .

[30]  Terry C. Daniel Data visualization for decision support in environmental management , 1992 .

[31]  Randy H. Gimblett,et al.  VISUAL SIMULATION: A USER'S GUIDE FOR ARCHITECTS, ENGINEERS, AND PLANNERS , 1990, Landscape Journal.

[32]  Ervin H. Zube,et al.  Perceptual Landscape Simulations: History and Prospect , 1987, Landscape Journal.

[33]  K. Craik,et al.  The Development of Perceived Environmental Quality Indices , 1976 .

[34]  R. Ulrich Human responses to vegetation and landscapes , 1986 .

[35]  Jack L. Nasar,et al.  Proximate physical cues to fear of crime , 1993 .

[36]  P L Busby,et al.  Environmental psychology 1989-1994. , 1996, Annual review of psychology.

[37]  T. Daniel Whither scenic beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century , 2001 .

[38]  Ian Bishop Paper for Computers in Urban Planning and Urban Management Honolulu, July 2001 BEYOND THE MOVING CAMERA: SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT FOR INTERACTIVE IMMERSIVE EXPLORATION OF URBAN ENVIRONMENTS , 2001 .

[39]  K. Painter The influence of street lighting improvements on crime, fear and pedestrian street use, after dark , 1996 .

[40]  S. Kaplan,et al.  Cognition and Environment: Function - ing in an Uncertain World , 1983 .

[41]  Ian D. Bishop,et al.  Experiential approaches to perception response in virtual worlds , 2001 .

[42]  Ricardo García-Mira,et al.  Environmental perception and cognitive maps , 2005 .

[43]  Richard Levy The Role of Computer Visualization in Design Review , 1999 .