Relationship between monocular and binocular depth cues for judgements of spatial information and spatial instrument design

The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of monoscopic and stereoscopic depth cues for spatial instrument design. Ten volunteer subjects judged the depth and altitude separation between two computer-generated objects located above a ground plane using either a stereoscopic or perspective display. The depth cues manipulated in the study were shadows, a texture gradient, droplines from the cubes to the ground plane, and the presence or absence of binocular disparity. The results indicated that depth judgements were significantly improved with the addition of both monocular and perspective depth cues while judgements of altitude were not. Furthermore, the addition of droplines to the display had the most significant effect on the accuracy of depth judgements, while the addition of a texture gradient on the horizontal grid plane had the least effect. It was also shown that the addition of shadows improved the accuracy of depth judgements but only slightly more than the addition of texture. When droplines were present, the addition of shadows did not add to depth perception nor did the addition of a texture gradient help depth perception if droplines were not present. Finally, stereoscopic viewing did not provide enhanced performance over perspective displays but did aid subjects in making more consistent spatial judgements regardless of the location of the target cube relative to the reference cube. Implications of the results for the design of spatial displays are discussed.

[1]  Stephen R. Ellis,et al.  Influence of a Perspective Cockpit Traffic Display Format on Pilot Avoidance Maneuvers , 1983 .

[2]  Kimberly A. Reardon.  The Effects of Nested Texture on a Landing-Judgment Task , 1988 .

[3]  Stephen R. Ellis,et al.  Head-mounted spatial instruments: Synthetic reality or impossible dream , 1988 .

[4]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Quantitative Evaluation of Perspective and Stereoscopic Displays in Three-Axis Manual Tracking Tasks , 1987, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[5]  J. Todd,et al.  Perception of three-dimensional form from patterns of optical texture. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  Stephen R. Ellis,et al.  Perceived Threat and Avoidance Maneuvers in Response to Cockpit Traffic Displays , 1984 .

[7]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  Visual Enhancements and Geometric Field of View as Factors in the Design of a Three-Dimensional Perspective Display , 1990 .

[8]  John M. Reising,et al.  A Comparison of a Stereographic 3-D Display versus a 2-D Display Using an Advanced Air-to-Air Format , 1988 .

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

[10]  J. Cutting,et al.  Minimodularity and the perception of layout. , 1988, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  K Berbaum,et al.  Depth Perception of Surfaces in Pictures: Looking for Conventions of Depiction in Pandora's Box , 1983, Perception.

[12]  Steven Todd,et al.  Three-Dimensional Displays: Perception, Implementation, and Applications , 1989 .

[13]  R E Cole,et al.  Display System Variables Affecting Operator Performance in Undersea Vehicles and Work Systems. , 1978 .

[14]  J S Tittle,et al.  Recovery of 3-D shape from binocular disparity and structure from motion , 1993, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  Estimation of spatial distortion as a function of geometric parameters of perspective , 1995, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern..

[16]  Woodrow Barfield,et al.  The Effects of Visual Cues to Realism and Perceived Impact Point during Final Approach , 1989 .

[17]  Robert L. Savoy.  Dynamic stereo displays for research on the recovery of three-dimensional structure , 1986 .

[18]  Suzanne V. Bemis,et al.  Operator Performance as a Function of Type of Display: Conventional versus Perspective , 1988 .

[19]  A. R. Buffett,et al.  The visual perception of depth using electro-optical display systems , 1980 .

[20]  Geraldine C. Kerne.  The Effect of Response Codes on the Accuracy of Making Absolute Judgments of Lineal Inclinations , 1963 .

[21]  L D Silverstein,et al.  Spatial Judgments with Monoscopic and Stereoscopic Presentation of Perspective Displays , 1992, Human factors.

[22]  Myron L. Braunstein,et al.  Depth perception through motion , 1976 .

[23]  I Rock,et al.  The Construction of a Plane from Pictorial Information , 1982, Perception.

[24]  H. C. van der Meer.  Interrelation of the effects of binocular disparity and perspective cues on judgments of depth and height , 1979 .

[25]  J. Cutting,et al.  Three Gradients and the Perception of Flat and Curved Surfaces , 1984 .

[26]  Andrew S. Glassner.  3D Computer Graphics , 1994 .

[27]  Everett Palmer,et al.  A Measure of Psychological Realism on a Visual Simulator , 1977 .

[28]  Felix Garcia,et al.  Volume visualization displays , 1989 .