skip to main content
10.1145/503376.503412acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PageschiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Women take a wider view

Published:20 April 2002Publication History

ABSTRACT

Published reports suggest that males significantly outperform females in navigating virtual environments. A novel navigation technique reported in CHI 2001, when combined with a large display and wide field of view, appeared to reduce that gender bias. That work has been extended with two navigation studies in order to understand the finding under carefully controlled conditions. The first study replicated the finding that a wide field of view coupled with a large display benefits both male and female users and reduces gender bias. The second study suggested that wide fields of view on a large display were useful to females despite a more densely populated virtual world. Implications for design of virtual worlds and large displays are discussed. Specifically, women take a wider field of view to achieve similar virtual environment navigation performance to men

References

  1. Alice 3D Authoring Tool, see http://www.alice.org/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Alfano, P. L., Michel, G. F. (1990). "Restricting the field of view: perceptual and performance effects." Perceptual and Motor Skills, 70 (1), 35--45.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  3. Astur, R. S., Ortiz, M. L., & Sutherland, R., J. (1998). A characterization of performance by men and women in a virtual Morris water task: A large and reliable sex difference. Behavioural Brain Research, 93, 185--90.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. Barfield, W., Lim, R., & Rosenberg, C. (1990). Visual enhancements and geometric field of view as factors in the design of a three-dimensional perspective display. Proceedings of the 34th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, 1470--1473.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. Chambers, W.W. (1982, April). Visual technology research simulator. Flight simulation-avionic systems and aero medical aspects. Royal Aeronautical Society's Flight Simulation Symposium, London.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Darken, R., Sibert, J. (1993). A toolset for navigation in virtual environments. Proceedings of UIST '93, ACM Press, 157--165. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Darken, R., Sibert, J. (1996). Navigating in large virtual worlds. The International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 8(1), 49--72. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Dolezal, H. (1982). Living in a world transformed: Perceptual and performatory adaptation to visual distortion. New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Draper, M.H., Viirre, E.S., Furness, T.A. & Gawron, V.J. (2001). Effects of image scale and system time delay on simulator sickness within head-coupled virtual environments. Human Factors, 43(1), 129--146.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  10. Eckstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, HH. & Dermen, D. (1976). Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests. Princeton, J.J.: Educational Testing Service.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Elvins, T., Nadeau, D., Schul, R., & Kirsh, D. (1998). Worldlets: 3D thumbnails for 3D browsing. Proceedings of CHI '98, ACM Press, 163--170. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hagen, M.A., Jones, R.K., & Reed, E.S. (1978). On a neglected variable in theories of pictorial perception: truncation of the visual field. Perception and Psychophysics, 23, 326--330.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Halpern, D. F. (2000). Sex Differences in Cognitive Abilities, 3rd Edition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., NJ.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Hosman, R., van der Haart, J. (1981). Effects of vestibular and visual motion perception on task performance. Acta Psychol., 48, 271--281.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Kenyon, R.V., Kneller, E.W. (1993). The effects of field of view size on the control of roll motion. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 23(1), 183--193.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Kimura, D. (1999). Sex and Cognition. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, pp. 1--66.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. Lynch, K. (1960). The Image of the City. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Passini, R. (1984). Wayfinding in Architecture. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Patrick, E., Cosgrove, D., Slavkovic, A., Rode, J., Verratti, T., & Chiselko, G. (2000). Using a large projection screen as an alternative to head-mounted displays for virtual environments. Proceedings of CHI 2000, CHI Letters 2(1), 478--485. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Piantanida, T.P., Boman, D., Larimer, J., Gille, J., & Reed, C. (1992). Studies of the field-of-view/resolution tradeoff in virtual reality. Proceedings of the SPIE: Human Vision, Visual Processing and Digital Display III, 1666, 448--456.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Ruddle, R., Payne, S., & Jones, D. (1999). The effects of maps on navigation and search strategies in very-large-scale virtual environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 5, 54--75.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  22. Sandor, P.B., Leger, A. (1991). Tracking with a restricted field of view. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 62(11), 1026--1031.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Sandstrom, N. J., Kaufman, J., & Huettel, S. A. (1998). Males and females use different distal cues in a virtual environment navigation task. Cognitive Brain Research, 6, 351--60.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  24. Siegel, A., White, S. The development of spatial representations of large-scale environments. In H. Reese (Ed.), Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 10, 10--55. New York: Academic Press.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Tan, D.S., Robertson, G.G., & Czerwinski, M. (2001). Exploring 3D navigation: combining speed-coupled flying with orbiting. Proceedings of CHI 2001, CHI Letters 2(1), 418--425. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Thorndyke, P., Hayes-Roth, B. (1982). Differences in spatial knowledge acquired from maps and navigation. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 560--589.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  27. Vinson, N. (1999). Design guidelines for landmarks to support navigation in virtual environments. Proceedings of CHI '99, ACM Press, 278--285. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Waller, D., Hunt, E., & Knapp, D. (1998). The transfer of spatial knowledge in virtual environment training. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(2), 129--143. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Wells, M.J., Venturino, M. (1990). Performance and head movements using a helmet-mounted display with different sized fields-of-view. Optical Engineering, 29(8), 870--877.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Witmer, B., Bailey, J., Knerr, B, & Parsons, K. Virtual spaces and real world places: Transfer of route knowledge. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 413--428. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Women take a wider view

          Recommendations

          Comments

          Login options

          Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

          Sign in
          • Published in

            cover image ACM Conferences
            CHI '02: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
            April 2002
            478 pages
            ISBN:1581134533
            DOI:10.1145/503376
            • Conference Chair:
            • Dennis Wixon

            Copyright © 2002 ACM

            Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

            Publisher

            Association for Computing Machinery

            New York, NY, United States

            Publication History

            • Published: 20 April 2002

            Permissions

            Request permissions about this article.

            Request Permissions

            Check for updates

            Qualifiers

            • Article

            Acceptance Rates

            CHI '02 Paper Acceptance Rate61of414submissions,15%Overall Acceptance Rate6,199of26,314submissions,24%

            Upcoming Conference

            CHI '24
            CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems
            May 11 - 16, 2024
            Honolulu , HI , USA

          PDF Format

          View or Download as a PDF file.

          PDF

          eReader

          View online with eReader.

          eReader