The effects of head-mounted display mechanics on distance judgments in virtual environments

In virtual environments that use head-mounted displays (HMD), distance judgments to targets on the ground are compressed, at least when indicated through visually-directed walking tasks. The same tasks performed in the real world yield veridical results over distances ranging from 2m to 25m. This paper describes experiments aimed at determining if mechanical aspects of HMDs such as mass and moments of inertia are responsible for the apparent distortion of distance. Our results indicate that the mechanical aspects of HMDs cannot explain the full magnitude of distance underestimation seen in HMD-based virtual environments, though they may account for a portion of the effect.

[1]  Jack M. Loomis,et al.  Absolute motion parallax weakly determines visual scale in real and virtual environments , 1995, Electronic Imaging.

[2]  Stephen R. Ellis,et al.  Judgments of the Distance to Nearby Virtual Objects: Interaction of Viewing Conditions and Accommodative Demand , 1997, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[3]  Peter Willemsen,et al.  Perceived egocentric distances in real, image-based, and traditional virtual environments , 2002, Proceedings IEEE Virtual Reality 2002.

[4]  James E. Cutting,et al.  Chapter 3 – Perceiving Layout and Knowing Distances: The Integration, Relative Potency, and Contextual Use of Different Information about Depth* , 1995 .

[5]  Larry F. Hodges,et al.  The Perception of Distance in Simulated Visual Displays:A Comparison of the Effectiveness and Accuracy of Multiple Depth Cues Across Viewing Distances , 1997, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[6]  Zijiang J. He,et al.  Distance determined by the angular declination below the horizon , 2001, Nature.

[7]  Peter Willemsen,et al.  The Influence of Restricted Viewing Conditions on Egocentric Distance Perception: Implications for Real and Virtual Indoor Environments , 2005, Perception.

[8]  J M Loomis,et al.  Visually perceived location is an invariant in the control of action , 1997, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Wallace J. Sadowski,et al.  Nonvisually Guided Locomotion to a Previously Viewed Target in Real and Virtual Environments , 1998, Hum. Factors.

[10]  J. Rieser,et al.  Visual Perception and the Guidance of Locomotion without Vision to Previously Seen Targets , 1990, Perception.

[11]  J. Thomson.  Is continuous visual monitoring necessary in visually guided locomotion? , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[12]  Jack M. Loomis,et al.  Visual perception of egocentric distance in real and virtual environments. , 2003 .

[13]  James P. Bliss,et al.  Distance Estimation in Virtual Environments , 1995 .

[14]  Jack M. Loomis,et al.  Limited Field of View of Head-Mounted Displays Is Not the Cause of Distance Underestimation in Virtual Environments , 2004, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[15]  Bob G. Witmer,et al.  Judging Perceived and Traversed Distance in Virtual Environments , 1998, Presence.

[16]  Peter Willemsen,et al.  Does the Quality of the Computer Graphics Matter when Judging Distances in Visually Immersive Environments? , 2004, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[17]  S S Fukusima,et al.  Visual perception of egocentric distance as assessed by triangulation. , 1997, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  John P. Lewis,et al.  Perceptuomotor adaptation: more than meets the eye , 2002 .

[19]  J. Loomis,et al.  Visual space perception and visually directed action. , 1992, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.