Effects of AR Display Context Switching and Focal Distance Switching on Human Performance

In augmented reality (AR) environments, information is often distributed between real world and virtual contexts, and often appears at different distances from the user. Therefore, to integrate the information, users must repeatedly switch context and refocus the eyes. To focus at different distances, the user's eyes must accommodate, which when done repeatedly can cause eyestrain and degrade task performance. An experiment was conducted that examined switching context and focal distance between a real and an AR environment, using a text-based visual search task and a monocular optical see-through AR display. Both context switching and focal distance switching resulted in significantly reduced performance. In addition, repeatedly performing the task caused visual fatigue to steadily increase. Performance was particularly poor for virtual text presented at optical infinity, and for target letters that participants tried to read before their eyes had completely accommodated to a new focal distance. The results show that context switching and focal distance switching are important AR user interface design issues.

[1]  Masao Sakata,et al.  How an automotive head-up display affects a driver's ability to recognize the forward view , 1991 .

[2]  Jens Grubert,et al.  Perceptual issues in optical-see-through displays , 2010, APGV '10.

[3]  D A Owens,et al.  Near work, visual fatigue, and variations of oculomotor tonus. , 1987, Investigative ophthalmology & visual science.

[4]  John T. Kelso,et al.  DIVERSE: A Framework for Building Extensible and Reconfigurable Device-Independent Virtual Environments and Distributed Asynchronous Simulations , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[5]  James F. O'Brien,et al.  Using blur to affect perceived distance and size , 2010, TOGS.

[6]  Steven K. Feiner,et al.  Perceptual issues in augmented reality revisited , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.

[7]  J. Edward Swan,et al.  Color blending in outdoor optical see-through AR: The effect of real-world backgrounds on user interface color , 2013, 2013 IEEE Virtual Reality (VR).

[8]  Lawrence W. Stark,et al.  Evaluation of the Effects of a Head-mounted Display on Ocular Accommodation , 1998, Presence.

[9]  M. Ernst,et al.  Focus cues affect perceived depth. , 2005, Journal of vision.

[10]  Hiroshi Kato,et al.  Development of Hologram Head-Up Display , 1992 .

[11]  Willibald A. Günthner,et al.  Pick-by-Vision: A first stress test , 2009, 2009 8th IEEE International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.

[12]  Bernard D. Adelstein,et al.  Localization of a Time-Delayed, Monocular Virtual Object Superimposed on a Real Environment , 2000, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[13]  Joseph L. Gabbard,et al.  Behind the Glass: Driver Challenges and Opportunities for AR Automotive Applications , 2014, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[14]  C. Johnson,et al.  Effects of luminance and stimulus distance on accommodation and visual resolution. , 1976, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[15]  Daniel J Weintraub,et al.  Human factors issues in head-up display design : the book of HUD , 1992 .

[16]  B. Rogers,et al.  Similarities between motion parallax and stereopsis in human depth perception , 1982, Vision Research.

[17]  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 .

[18]  V. V. Krishnan,et al.  A Heuristic Model for the Human Vergence Eye Movement System , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[19]  Adrian Glasser,et al.  Age related changes in accommodative dynamics in humans , 2006, Vision Research.

[20]  Kishore V. Chellappan,et al.  Laser-based displays: a review. , 2010, Applied optics.

[21]  Joseph L. Gabbard.  Usability Engineering of Text Drawing Styles in Augmented Reality User Interfaces , 2008 .

[22]  Daniel R. Tufano,et al.  Automotive HUDs: The Overlooked Safety Issues , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[23]  Mtm Marc Lambooij,et al.  Visual Discomfort and Visual Fatigue of Stereoscopic Displays: A Review , 2009 .

[24]  J. Edward Swan,et al.  Military Applications of Augmented Reality , 2011, Handbook of Augmented Reality.

[25]  S. N. Roscoe.  When Day Is Done and Shadows Fall, We Miss the Airport Most of All , 1979 .

[26]  P E Runge.  Eduard Jaeger's Test-Types (Schrift-Scalen) and the historical development of vision tests. , 2000, Transactions of the American Ophthalmological Society.

[27]  Graham K Edgar,et al.  Visual accomodation problems with head-up and helmet-mounted displays? , 1994 .

[28]  Deborah Hix,et al.  The Effects of Text Drawing Styles, Background Textures, and Natural Lighting on Text Legibility in Outdoor Augmented Reality , 2006, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[29]  S N Roscoe,et al.  Eye accommodation to head-up virtual images. , 1988, Human factors.

[30]  Victor Ng-Thow-Hing,et al.  Personal Navi: Benefits of an Augmented Reality Navigational Aid Using a See-Thru 3D Volumetric HUD , 2014, AutomotiveUI.

[31]  Hiroaki Shinkai,et al.  Visibility of Head up Display (HUD) for Automobiles , 1991 .

[32]  Nicholas M. Simonelli.  Apparent Size and Visual Accommodation under Day and Night Conditions , 1979 .

[33]  Holger Regenbrecht,et al.  Augmented reality projects in the automotive and aerospace industries , 2005, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[34]  H. Nefs.  Depth of field affects perceived depth-width ratios in photographs of natural scenes. , 2012, Seeing and perceiving.

[35]  Timo Engelke,et al.  An augmented reality training platform for assembly and maintenance skills , 2013, Robotics Auton. Syst..

[36]  P. Hibbard,et al.  Visual discomfort and depth-of-field , 2013, i-Perception.

[37]  Kevin J. MacKenzie,et al.  Vergence and accommodation to multiple-image-plane stereoscopic displays: "real world" responses with practical image-plane separations? , 2012, J. Electronic Imaging.

[38]  Donald O. Mutti.  Introduction to the Optics of the Eye , 2003 .

[39]  L Stark,et al.  Topology of the near response triad , 1990, Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians.

[40]  W Jaschinski-Kruza,et al.  Eyestrain in VDU Users: Viewing Distance and the Resting Position of Ocular Muscles , 1991, Human factors.

[41]  Richard L. Hughes,et al.  Psychological Considerations in the Design of Helmet-Mounted Displays and Sights: Overview and Annotated Bibliography , 1973 .

[42]  James S. Wolffsohn,et al.  THE EFFECT OF VIEWING A CAR HEAD-UP DISPLAY ON OCULAR ACCOMMODATION AND RESPONSE TIMES , 1998 .

[43]  L. Stark,et al.  Nonlinear Servoanalysis of Human Lens Accommodation , 1965, IEEE Trans. Syst. Sci. Cybern..

[44]  Rüdiger Mecke,et al.  Mobile Augmented Reality in industrial applications: Approaches for solution of user-related issues , 2008, 2008 7th IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Mixed and Augmented Reality.

[45]  J R Tresilian,et al.  Ordinal depth information from accommodation? , 2000, Ergonomics.

[46]  M. F. Wesner,et al.  Accommodation fatigue and dark focus: The effects of accommodation-free visual work as assessed by two psychophysical methods , 1983, Perception & psychophysics.

[47]  David M. Hoffman,et al.  Vergence-accommodation conflicts hinder visual performance and cause visual fatigue. , 2008, Journal of vision.

[48]  BY F. W. CAMIPBELL,et al.  DYNAMICS OF ACCOMMODATION RESPONSES OF THE HUMAN EYE , 2006 .

[49]  G WESTHEIMER,et al.  Dynamics of accommodation responses of the human eye , 1960, The Journal of physiology.

[50]  D A Owens,et al.  The Mandelbaum effect: evidence for an accommodative bias toward intermediate viewing distances. , 1979, Journal of the Optical Society of America.

[51]  M. Schijven,et al.  Systematic review on the effectiveness of augmented reality applications in medical training , 2016, Surgical Endoscopy.

[52]  Taehyun Rhee,et al.  Reducing Visual Discomfort with HMDs Using Dynamic Depth of Field , 2015, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[53]  Mark Mon-Williams,et al.  Natural problems for stereoscopic depth perception in virtual environments , 1995, Vision Research.

[54]  S. N. Roscoe,et al.  Training good eyes to see better , 1985 .

[55]  Martin S. Banks,et al.  A stereo display prototype with multiple focal distances , 2004, SIGGRAPH 2004.

[56]  Norbert Fürstenau,et al.  On the use of transparent rear projection screens to reduce head-down time in the air-traffic control tower , 2004 .

[57]  J Norman,et al.  Visual Accommodation and Virtual Image Displays: Target Detection and Recognition , 1986, Human factors.

[58]  Richard F. Haines,et al.  The Utility of Head-Up Displays: Eye-Focus vs Decision Times , 1984 .

[59]  Nikhil Balram,et al.  Depth-disparity calibration for augmented reality on binocular optical see-through displays , 2015, MMSys.

[60]  Olov Östberg,et al.  Accommodation and visual fatigue in display work , 1980 .

[61]  Stanley N. Roscoe,et al.  Bigness Is in the Eye of the Beholder , 1985, Human factors.

[62]  Erik Blaser,et al.  Retinal blur and the perception of egocentric distance. , 2010, Journal of vision.