Effects of perspective elevation and environmental geometry on representation of a virtual room space

The present study investigated how perspective elevation and room geometry influenced mental representation of spatial layout in virtual rooms. One virtual rectangular and one virtual cylindrical room were constructed. Subjects observed the spatial layout on the floor from five perspectives along the vertical dimension of each virtual room. Then they judged the direction of objects with respect to egocentric and canonical coordinates. The analysis of spatial judgment indicated that judgment accuracy of vertical direction decreased as the perspective elevated, while global situation awareness was best maintained at the 45° elevation angle. The effect of perspective elevation on judgment of horizontal direction was only found in the rectangular room. Moreover, subjects judged the relative direction between objects more quickly in the cylindrical room than in the rectangular room. Applications of these findings to virtual environment design were discussed.

[1]  Barbara Hayes-Roth,et al.  Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation , 1982, Cognitive Psychology.

[2]  Timothy Cribbin,et al.  An Investigation of Visual Cues used to Create and Support Frames of Reference and Visual Search Tasks in Desktop Virtual Environments , 2002, Virtual Reality.

[3]  Herbert A. Colle,et al.  The Room Effect: Metric Spatial Knowledge of Local and Separated Regions , 1998, Presence.

[4]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  Spatial Discrimination in Three-Dimensional Displays as a Function of Computer Graphics Eyepoint Elevation and Stereoscopic Viewing , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[5]  S R Ellis,et al.  The Effect of Perspective Geometry on Judged Direction in Spatial Information Instruments , 1986, Human factors.

[6]  R. D. Easton,et al.  Object-array structure, frames of reference, and retrieval of spatial knowledge. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[7]  Timothy P. McNamara,et al.  Systems of Spatial Reference in Human Memory , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Effects of elevation angle disparity, complexity, and feature type on relating out-of-cockpit field of view to an electronic cartographic map , 1999 .

[9]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Visuospatial Thinking: Design Applications of Visual Spatial Thinking: The Importance of Frame of Reference , 2005 .

[10]  S. Wilson,et al.  Navigational tools for desktop virtual environment interfaces , 2004, Virtual Reality.

[11]  Herbert A. Colle,et al.  Spatial Orientation in 3-D Desktop Displays: Using Rooms for Organizing Information , 2003, Hum. Factors.

[12]  Laura A. Carlson,et al.  Selecting a reference frame , 1999, Spatial Cogn. Comput..

[13]  T. McNamara,et al.  Orientation and perspective dependence in route and survey learning. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[14]  Terry Allard,et al.  Spatial Orientation and Wayfinding in Large-Scale Virtual Spaces: An Introduction , 1998, Presence.

[15]  Tyler T Prevett,et al.  Exploring the dimensions of egocentricity in aircraft navigation displays , 1995 .

[16]  N. Burgess,et al.  Geometric determinants of human spatial memory , 2004, Cognition.

[17]  Christina Vasilakis,et al.  Multi-perspective collaborative design in persistent networked virtual environments , 1996, Proceedings of the IEEE 1996 Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium.

[18]  Doug A. Bowman,et al.  Evaluating the effects of frame of reference on spatial collaboration using desktop collaborative virtual environments , 2004, Virtual Reality.

[19]  Timothy P. McNamara,et al.  How Are the Locations of Objects in the Environment Represented in Memory? , 2003, Spatial Cognition.

[20]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Frames of Reference for Navigation , 1999 .

[21]  Steffen Werner,et al.  Cognition Meets Le Corbusier-Cognitive Principles of Architectural Design , 2003, Spatial Cognition.