Desney S. Tan
Darren Gergle
Peter G. Scupelli
Randy Pausch
ABSTRACT
Previous results have shown that users perform better on spatial orientation tasks involving static 2D scenes when working on physically large displays as compared to small ones. This was found to be true even when the displays presented the same images at equivalent visual angles. Further investigation has suggested that large displays may provide a greater sense of presence, which biases users into adopting more efficient strategies to perform tasks. In this work, we extend those findings, demonstrating that users are more effective at performing 3D virtual navigation tasks on large displays. We also show that even though interacting with the environment affects performance, effects induced by interactivity are independent of those induced by physical display size. Together, these findings allow us to derive guidelines for the design and presentation of interactive 3D environments on physically large displays.
- Arthur, K.W. (2000). Effects of field of view on performance with head-mounted displays. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(5B), 2614. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Baudisch, P., Good, N., Belloti, V., & Schraedley, P. (2002). Keeping things in context: A comparative evaluation of focus plus context screens, overviews, and zooming. Proceedings of CHI 2002, 259--266. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bell, S. (2002). Spatial cognition and scale: A child's perspective. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 22, 9--27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Booth, K., Fisher, B., Page, S., Ware, C., & Widen, S. (2000). Wayfinding in a virtual environment. Graphics Interface.Google Scholar
- Bystrom, K.E., Barfield, W., & Hendrix, C. (1999). A conceptual model of the sense of presence in virtual environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8(2), 241--244. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Chance, S.S., Gaunet, F., Beall, A.C., & Loomis, J.M. (1998). Locomotion mode affects the updating of objects encounter during travel: The contribution of vestibular and proprioceptive inputs to path integration. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 7(2), 168--178. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cutmore, T.R.H., Hine, T.J., Maberly, K.J., Langford, N.M., & Hawgood, G. (2000). Cognitive and gender factors influencing navigation in a virtual environment. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 53, 223--249. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Czerwinski, M., Tan, D.S., & Robertson, G.G. (2002). Women take a wider view. Proceedings of CHI 2002, 195--202. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ekstrom, R.B., French, J.W., Harman, H.H, & Derman, D. (1976). Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Educational Testing Service: Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
- Flach, J. (1990). Control with an eye for perception: Percursors to an active psychophysics. Ecological Psychology, 2, 83--111.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Fujita, N., Klatzky, R.L., Loomis, J.M., & Golledge, R.G. (1993). The encoding-error model of pathway completion without vision. Geographical Analysis, 25, 295--314.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Golledge, R.G. (Ed.). (1999) Wayfinding behavior: Cognitive mapping and other spatial processes. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
- Grabe, M.E., Lombard, M., Reich, R.D., Bracken, C.C., & Ditton, T.B. (1999). The role of screen size in viewer experiences of media content. Visual Communication Quarterly, 6, 4--9.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Just, M.A., & Carpenter, P.A. (1985). Cognitive coordinate systems: Accounts of mental rotation and individual differences in spatial ability. Psychological Review, 92(2), 137--172.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Kearns, M.J., Warren, W.H., Duchon, A.P., & Tarr, M.J. (2002). Path integration from optic flow and body senses in a homing task. Perception, 31, 349--374.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Klatzky, R.L., Loomis, J.M., Beall, A.C., Chance, S.S., & Golledge, R.G. (1998). Spatial updating of self-position and orientation during real, imagined, and virtual locomotion. Psychological Science, 9(4), 293--298.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Loomis, J.M., Klatzky, R.L., Golledge, R.G., Cicinelli, J.G., Pellegrino, J.W., & Fry, P.A. (1993). Nonvisual navigation by blind and sighted: Assessment of path integration ability. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(1), 73--91.Google ScholarCross Ref
- MacIntyre, B., Mynatt, E.D., Voida, S., Hansen, K.M., Tullio, J., & Corso, G.M. (2001). Support for multitasking and background awareness using interactive peripheral displays, Proceedings of UIST 2001, 41--50. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Patrick, E., Cosgrove, D., Slavkovic, A., Rode, J.A., Verratti, T., & Chiselko, G. (2000). Using a large projection screen as an alternative to head-mounted displays for virtual environments. Proceedings of CHI 2000, 478--485. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Peruch, P., May, M., & Wartenberg, F. (1997). Homing in virtual environments: Effects of field of view and path layout. Perception, 26, 301--311.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Philbeck, J.W., Klatzky, R.L., Behrmann, M., Loomis, J.M., & Goodridge, J. (2001). Active control of locomotion facilitates nonvisual navigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 141--153.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Prothero, J.D., & Hoffman, H.D. (1995). Widening the field of view increases the sense of presence within immersive virtual environments. Technical Report, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, R-95-4.Google Scholar
- Riecke, B.E., van Veen, H.A.H.C., & Büülthoff, H.H. (2000). Visual homing is possible without landmarks: A path integration study in virtual reality. Max-Planck-Institut für biologische Kybernetik, Germany. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Rieser, J. J. (1989) Access to knowledge of spatial structure at novel points of observation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15, 1157--1165.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Slater, M., & Usoh, M. (1993). Presence in Immersive Virtual Environments. Proceedings of IEEE VRAIS, 90--96.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tan, D.S., Gergle, D., Scupelli, P.G., Pausch, R. (2003). With similar visual angles, larger displays improve spatial performance. Proceedings of CHI 2003, 217--224. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tan, D.S., Stefanucci, J.K., Proffitt, D.R., & Pausch, R. (2001). The Infocockpit: Providing location and pace to aid human memory. Workshop on Perceptive User Interfaces 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Physically large displays improve path integration in 3D virtual navigation tasks
Recommendations
With similar visual angles, larger displays improve spatial performance
CHI '03: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing SystemsLarge wall-sized displays are becoming prevalent. Although researchers have articulated qualitative benefits of group work on large displays, little work has been done to quantify the benefits for individual users. We ran two studies comparing the ...
Physically large displays improve performance on spatial tasks
Large wall-sized displays are becoming prevalent. Although researchers have articulated qualitative benefits of group work on large displays, little work has been done to quantify the benefits for individual users. In this article we present four ...
Large displays enhance spatial knowledge of a virtual environment
APGV '06: Proceedings of the 3rd symposium on Applied perception in graphics and visualizationPrevious research has found performance for several egocentric tasks to be superior on physically large displays relative to smaller ones, even when visual angle is held constant. This finding is believed to be due to the more immersive nature of large ...
Comments