scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal ArticleDOI

Personal space in virtual reality

01 Oct 2006-Vol. 3, Iss: 4, pp 412-428
TL;DR: Observers exhibited significant negative reactions to violations of interpersonal space in stereoscopic 3D displays, which were equivalent to those experienced in the natural environment and have important implications for the creation of 3D media and the use of virtual reality systems.
Abstract: Improving the sense of “presence” is a common goal of three-dimensional (3D) display technology for film, television, and virtual reality. However, there are instances in which 3D presentations may elicit unanticipated negative responses. For example, it is well established that violations of interpersonal space cause discomfort in real-world situations. Here we ask if people respond similarly when viewing life-sized stereoscopic images. Observers rated their level of comfort in response to animate and inanimate objects in live and virtual (stereoscopic projection) viewing conditions. Electrodermal activity was also recorded to monitor their physiological response to these stimuli. Observers exhibited significant negative reactions to violations of interpersonal space in stereoscopic 3D displays, which were equivalent to those experienced in the natural environment. These data have important implications for the creation of 3D media and the use of virtual reality systems.

Summary (1 min read)

Introduction

  • Subjects exhibited significant negative reactions to violations of interpersonal space in stereoscopic 3D displays, which were equivalent to those experienced in the natural environment.
  • Little effort has been made to understand what, if any, effects interpersonal factors have on a viewer’s comfort level in immersive environments.
  • The most relevant work was reported recently by Bailenson, Blascovich, Beall and Loomis (2001).
  • Both psychophysical and physiological measures of discomfort were used to assess the impact of intrusions into interpersonal space.

Apparatus and stimuli

  • High-resolution stereoscopic images of the stimuli were taken using two Olympus Camedia C-2500L digital cameras fixed at a separation of 6.5 cm.
  • The subjects wore Stereographics 3D shutter glasses that switched in synchrony with the projector (at 120 Hz, giving 60 Hz per eye).
  • A Macintosh G3 computer and MATLAB software were used to present the stimuli, and to record the verbal ratings made by the subjects (input by the experimenter).
  • The device was calibrated prior to each session using fixed impedance calibration points so that voltages on the data acquisition card could be converted to skin conductance values.
  • Following application of the electrodes, the interface was given time to stabilize and a baseline EDA reading was taken for 120 seconds.

Procedure

  • Participants viewed each image once (to avoid familiarity effects) in quasi-random order.
  • In Experiment 1 images were viewed for 5s.
  • Further, both this proximity effect and the mean discomfort level were higher for people than for objects.
  • In Experiment 2 the authors make a direct comparison between the identical animate and inanimate stimuli presented ‘live’ or virtually.

Rating Results

  • Figure 2 depicts rating data from Experiment 2 for the virtual (A) and live (B) test conditions.
  • The GreenhouseGeisser correction was implemented for the evaluation of the effect of distance.
  • Importantly, when individuals who do not exhibit the proximity effect in the live test condition are removed, the results replicate those of the first Experiment.
  • As noted below, removal of these subjects did not effect the pattern of the EDA data.

EDA Results

  • EDA was quantified as the difference between the between skin conductance prior to stimulus presentation and the peak reading during a trial.
  • The authors have shown that intrusion into one’s personal distance zone (Hall, 1963) by virtual 3D stimuli can cause significant negative reactions.
  • The latter group had no information regarding the nature of the experiment, but most had participated in psychophysical studies previously.
  • That is in both cases, the live and virtual ratings were most similar at viewing distances of 0.5 and 2m.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

PERSONAL SPACE IN VIRTUAL REALITY
Laurie M. Wilcox, Robert S. Allison, Samuel Elfassy and Cynthia Grelik
York University,
Toronto, Ontario
Improving the sense of ‘presence’ is a common goal of 3D display technology for film,
television and virtual reality. However, there are instances in which 3D presentation may
elicit unanticipated negative responses. For example, it is well established that violations of
interpersonal space cause discomfort in real-world situations. Here we ask if people respond
similarly when viewing life-sized stereoscopic images. Observers rated their level of
comfort in response to animate and inanimate objects in live and virtual (stereoscopic
projection) viewing conditions. Electrodermal activity was also recorded to monitor their
physiological response to these stimuli. Subjects exhibited significant negative reactions to
violations of interpersonal space in stereoscopic 3D displays, which were equivalent to those
experienced in the natural environment. These data have important implications for the
creation of 3D media and the use of virtual reality systems.
INTRODUCTION
Stereoscopic 3D display technology has increasingly
been employed for applications such as IMAX™
theatres and immersive virtual reality systems such
as the CAVE™. Considerable research has been
directed towards the physiological effects of 3D
immersive displays such as fatigue and eye-strain.
However, little effort has been made to understand
what, if any, effects interpersonal factors have on a
viewer’s comfort level in immersive environments.
One such potential factor is violation of one’s
interpersonal space. There is considerable evidence
in the psychological literature for the existence of an
area surrounding a person’s body, intrusion into
which is often uncomfortable and generally not
permitted (Altman, 1975). In the popular sit-com,
Seinfeld, a character known as the ‘close talker’
played on this fact for comic effect. In this paper, we
ask whether a virtual close talker would be as
bothersome.
Hall (1963) subdivided interpersonal space into
four zones. The two of most interest here are the
personal distance zone, in which smell, touch, and
sight are potentially exchanged, and the social
distance zone, in which visual contact is not finely
tuned, and smell, touch, and body heat are usually
not exchanged (Hall, 1963). Invasions of the
personal distance zone elicit the strongest reactions.
For instance, Felipe and Sommer (1966) showed
that when a violation of personal space occurred by
a confederate, participants responded to the intrusion
by shifting position, exposing their backs and
shoulders to the confederate, or simply leaving the
area.
There has been little effort to quantify the effects
of violations of interpersonal space in virtual
environments. The most relevant work was reported
recently by Bailenson, Blascovich, Beall and
Loomis (2001). They found that participants tended
to keep a greater distance from an avatar (human-
like character) than a similar sized cylinder as they
explored a three-dimensional immersive virtual
environment. These results are consistent with the
hypothesis that personal space is maintained in
virtual environments. However, the observed
avoidance of the avatar could also be attributed to
the fact that it did not appear life-like, and in fact
may have been startling. In our first experiment we
used 3D images of people and objects presented at a
range of viewing distances to determine if observers
experience violations of personal space in virtual
environments. In the second experiment we directly
compared reactions to violations of personal space in
live and virtual settings. In this last study, both
psychophysical and physiological measures of
discomfort were used to assess the impact of
intrusions into interpersonal space.

METHODS
Subjects
Participants in Experiments 1 (n = 22) and 2 (n = 16)
were volunteers ranging in age from 18 to 35 yrs.
All participants had normal stereopsis as assessed
using the RandDot Stereotest and wore their
prescribed optical correction.
Apparatus and stimuli
High-resolution stereoscopic images of the stimuli
were taken using two Olympus Camedia C-2500L
digital cameras fixed at a separation of 6.5 cm. The
cameras were calibrated and the images rectified
using the Camera Calibration Toolbox for Matlab
(www.vision.caltech.edu/bouguetj/calib_doc/index.html). The
stimuli were either animate (people) or inanimate
(objects). All stimuli were photographed at three
distances, 0.5, 1.0, and 2 meters.
In the virtual test sessions, images were presented
using an Electrohome Model Marquee-8000 CRT
projector and a 2.35 by 1.73 meter back-projection
screen. All testing was performed in a dimly lit
room; illumination and room temperature were held
constant to avoid potential confounds (Adams and
Zuckerman, 1991). The observers were seated in a
chair 1m from the screen with their heads positioned
in a chin rest. The subjects wore Stereographics
3D shutter glasses that switched in synchrony with
the projector (at 120 Hz, giving 60 Hz per eye).
This allowed presentation of the appropriate
stereoscopic half-images to each eye separately. A
Macintosh G3 computer and MATLAB software
were used to present the stimuli, and to record the
verbal ratings made by the subjects (input by the
experimenter).
In Experiment 2, in the live test condition, a chin
rest was also used and a mechanical shutter
controlled the participants’ view. Objects were
mounted on pedestals so that the vertical centre of
the object was at the eye level of the participant. The
animate stimuli were seated facing the observer,
again at eye level. As in the 3D images of these
same people, the animate stimuli fixated on a point
20 degrees to the right of the observer.
A physiological measure of arousal was taken in
Experiment 2, in both the live and virtual test
conditions. Subject's electrodermal activity (EDA)
was monitored using a Beckman GSR Type R411
module in constant current mode. The output of the
module was connected to the experimental computer
via a National Instruments PCI-MIO-16XE-50 data
acquisition card sampling at 20 Hz with 16-bit
precision. The device was calibrated prior to each
session using fixed impedance calibration points so
that voltages on the data acquisition card could be
converted to skin conductance values. At the
beginning of each experimental session, Ag/AgCl
surface electrodes were connected to the medial
phalanx of the index and middle finger of the
participant’s non-dominant hand using an isotonic
paste. Following application of the electrodes, the
interface was given time to stabilize and a baseline
EDA reading was taken for 120 seconds. For each
trial, continuous recordings of EDA data began 2
seconds prior to presentation of the stimulus and
ended when the stimulus disappeared.
Procedure
Participants viewed each image once (to avoid
familiarity effects) in quasi-random order. In
Experiment 1 images were viewed for 5s. In
Experiment 2 each trial lasted 12s, to permit
adequate EDA sampling, and in the live test
condition to provide sufficient time to exchange the
stimuli. In all conditions, when the test image/object
was removed participants were asked to rate their
level of comfort in response to the stimulus they had
just viewed. A Likert scale was used, which ranged
from 1 (comfortable, not intrusive) to 7 (very
uncomfortable, very intrusive). In Experiment 1 the
observers participated in the virtual condition only,
while in Experiment 2 each participant was tested in
a live and a virtual session, on non-consecutive days.
To avoid order effects, half of the participants in
Experiment 2 were tested with live stimuli first,
virtual second and vice versa.
RESULTS
Experiment 1
Figure 1 shows the average rating data for stimuli
presented at each of the three distances in
Experiment 1 (virtual testing only).

A repeated-measures ANOVA showed main effects
of both viewing distance (F(1.1 ,23.3) =132.35, p <
0.05) and stimulus type (F=(1,21)=179.40, p <
0.05). The interaction between these two variables
was also significant (F(1.29,27.21)=15.96, p<0.05).
Note that the assumption of sphericity was violated
for the distance and interaction analyses so the
Greenhouse-Geisser correction was applied. From
this analysis and Figure 1 it is clear that there is an
increase in discomfort as 3D images are moved
closer to the observer. Further, the reaction to these
images is more intense when the images depict
people rather than objects. The proximity effect is
more pronounced for animate stimuli as
demonstrated by a significant interaction between
distance and object type.
Experiment 2
Experiment 1 showed that individuals do experience
violations of interpersonal space when presented
with virtual 3D images of people and objects.
Further, both this proximity effect and the mean
discomfort level were higher for people than for
objects. In Experiment 2 we make a direct
comparison between the identical animate and
inanimate stimuli presented ‘live’ or virtually.
Further, in this study we include a measure of
physiological arousal to corroborate observers
subjective ratings.
Rating Results
Figure 2 depicts rating data from Experiment 2 for
the virtual (A) and live (B) test conditions.
Figure 2 (A and B). Average rating data are shown here for
objects (squares) and people (circles) in the virtual (A) and live
(B) test conditions. Data are averaged across 16 subjects, and the
error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean.
As in Experiment 1, animate stimuli are consistently
rated higher (more uncomfortable) than inanimate
stimuli and discomfort increases as the stimuli
approach the observers. Results of the analysis of
variance showed main effects of both viewing
distance (F(1.4,21.6) = 41.8, p<.05), and stimulus
type (F(1,15) = 5.99 p<.05). The Greenhouse-
Geisser correction was implemented for the
evaluation of the effect of distance. There was no
difference between the ratings made in the live and
virtual test conditions (F(1,15) = 2.9, p>.05) and
none of the remaining interaction terms were
significant. Closer evaluation of these data revealed
six subjects whose pattern of responses was
inconsistent with that reported in Experiment 1; that
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
0.5 1 2
Viewing Distance (m)
Average Rating
Virtual Objects
Virtual People
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
0.5 1 2
Viewing Distance (m)
Average Rating
Live Objects
Live People
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
0.5 1 2
Average Rating
Objects
People
Figure 1. Comfort ratings obtained in response to 3D images of
people (open circles) and objects (closed circles) at each of three
viewing distances. Ratings are averaged across 22 subjects, and
the error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean.
2A
2B

is they did not show the classic proximity effect. We
repeated the analysis of variance, including only
those observers who showed the proximity effect in
the live test condition. The rationale is that it is
unreasonable to expect observers who do not
experience the phenomenon in real exposure
conditions, to exhibit it in response to 3D images.
This analysis (n=10) also shows significant main
effects of viewing distance, and of stimulus type.
Importantly, when individuals who do not exhibit
the proximity effect in the live test condition are
removed, the results replicate those of the first
Experiment. In particular there was a significant
stimulus by distance interaction (F(1.2, 10.8)=15.8,
p<.05) that was not present in the original analysis.
As noted below, removal of these subjects did not
effect the pattern of the EDA data.
EDA Results
EDA was quantified as the difference between the
between skin conductance prior to stimulus presentation
and the peak reading during a trial. Figure 3 shows the
average reading for each image class at each distance for
both live (A) and virtual (B) settings.
Figure 3 (A and B). Average EDA data are shown here for
objects (squares) and people (circles) in the virtual (A) and live
(B) test conditions. Data are averaged across 12 subjects, and the
error bars represent ± one standard error of the mean.
Due to technical difficulties with the recording
apparatus EDA data from four of the subjects were
not included (n = 12). Analysis of variance (using
the Greenhouse-Geisser correction) of the EDA
results revealed a significant interaction between the
type of stimulus and viewing distance (F(1.53,16.9)
= 4.1, p<0.05). The identical pattern of results was
obtained when those who did not experience the
proximity effect in the live test conditions were
omitted (n=9).
DISCUSSION
We have shown that intrusion into one’s personal
distance zone (Hall, 1963) by virtual 3D stimuli can
cause significant negative reactions. As predicted,
this proximity effect is greater for images of people
than for images of objects, and decreases at viewing
distances greater than 0.5m. Experiment 2
demonstrated that the response to invasion of virtual
personal space is equivalent to the response to the
same stimuli in a live setting. Further, physiological
measures of arousal are consistent with the
observers’ ratings, a finding that corroborates our
subjective rating measure.
Comparison of Experiments 1 and 2 shows larger
differences between ratings for animate and
inanimate stimuli in the first study. This is likely due
to the subject population. That is, naïve students
were recruited for Experiment 1, most of whom had
never been in an experimental setting before. On the
other hand in Experiment 2, because subjects were
required to participate in two sessions, we recruited
subjects from neighbouring vision laboratories. The
latter group had no information regarding the nature
of the experiment, but most had participated in
psychophysical studies previously. As a result they
were generally more comfortable and tended to
make lower ratings. This difference likely explains
why several subjects in Experiment 2 failed to
exhibit the classic proximity effect, even under live
test conditions.
One of the objectives of Experiment 2 was to
make a direct comparison of subject’s reaction to
live and virtual stimuli at different viewing
distances. To this end we calculated the ratio of
ratings in the live and virtual test conditions for
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.5 1 2
Viewing Distance (m)
Virtual Objects
Virtual People
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.5 1 2
Viewing Distance (m)
Live Objects
Live People
Skin Conductance (µS)
Skin Conductance (µS)
3A
3B

objects (1.1, 1.29, 0.98 for 0.5, 1 and 2m
respectively) and people (1.19,1.43,1.0). Ratios
equal to one indicate that the ratings were identical,
while ratios greater than one result from lower
ratings in the virtual condition.
It is clear that ratings were very similar,
particularly at the near and far viewing distances.
Further, the pattern of ratings was the same for
objects and people. That is in both cases, the live
and virtual ratings were most similar at viewing
distances of 0.5 and 2m. At 1m ratings in response
to virtual stimuli were lower than responses to live
stimuli. It is possible that this is related to the
reduction in cue conflict at 1m. That is, the
stereoscopic images were taken at three viewing
distances, however, the observers were always
seated 1m from the display. Therefore, in the 1m
condition, there was less conflict between vergence
and accommodation. It is important to note that
discomfort introduced by the display characteristics
cannot account for our proximity results; such
effects should have applied equally to animate and
inanimate stimuli.
Lombard (1995) has proposed an evolutionary
explanation for ‘parasocial’ relationships. He has
argued that humans have not had sufficient exposure
to audio-visual media to allow them to adapt their
social responses. Therefore, stimuli presented in
immersive environments are not correctly processed
as symbols, and as a result elicit the same responses
as in live interactions. The use of stereoscopic
displays is an important component of this response,
for photographs of people do not elicit avoidance
behaviour (Argyle and Dean, 1965). Thus, while an
improved sense of presence may result from the use
of 3D display technology, this presence elicits both
positive and negative aspects of interactions in the
real world. Therefore, the content and the intended
audience impact should be jointly considered when
choosing display media. For instance, if the goal is a
positive, relaxed reaction to animate stimuli, then
3D displays should be used with a moderate range of
depth values. However, this phenomenon can also be
exploited to, say, evoke real audience discomfort
when faced with a virtual ‘closetalker’.
REFERENCES
Adams, L. & Zuckerman, D. (1991). The effect of
lighting conditions on personal space
requirements. The Journal of General
Psychology, 118(4), 335-340.
Altman, I. (1975). The environment and social
behaviour: Privacy, personal space, territory,
crowding. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole
Publishing Company.
Argyle, M. & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance
and affiliation. Sociometry, 28(3), 289-304.
Bailenson J.N., Blascovich J., Beall A.C., and
Loomis J. (2001) Equilibrium Theory Revisited:
Mutual Gaze and Personal Space in Virtual
Environments. Presence: Teleoperators and
Virtual Environments, 10, (6), 583 – 598.
Felipe, N. J. & Sommer, R. (1966). Invasions of
personal space. Social Problems, 14(2), 206-214.
Hall, E. T. (1963) A system for the notation of
proxemic behavior. American Anthropologist, 65,
1003-1026.
Hayduk, L. A. (1981). The shape of personal space –
An experimental investigation. Canadian Journal
Of Behavioural Science, 13(1), 87-93.
Lombard, M. (1995). Direct responses to people on
the screen: Television and personal Space.
Communications Research, 22(3), 288-32
Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Current trends in the use of mediated communication are reviewed and a vision for near-future second and foreign language (L2) learning is offered that utilizes emerging media as a means for adding real world relevance to in-class uses of internet-mediated communication tools.
Abstract: In light of the increasingly blurred line between mediated and nonmediated contexts for social, professional, and educational purposes, attention to the presence and use of innovative digital media is critical to the consideration of the future of computer-assisted language learning (CALL). This article reviews current trends in the use of mediated communication and offers a vision for near-future second and foreign language (L2) learning that utilizes emerging media as (a) meaningful contexts for L2 language development and (b) a means for adding real world relevance to in-class uses of internet-mediated communication tools. In this article, we first explore a sampling of Web 2.0 technologies (e.g., blogs, wikis, and social bookmarking) related to collaborative content building and dissemination of information. We then consider three types of 3-dimensional virtual environments, including open social virtualities (such as Second Life and There), massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs) (e.g., World of Warcraft, Everquest, and Eve Online), and synthetic immersive environments (SIEs, i.e., visually rendered spaces which combine aspects of open social virtualities with goal-directed gaming models to address specific learning objectives). In particular, we report on SIEs as they might be used to foster interlanguage pragmatic development and briefly report on an existing project in this area. The ultimate goal is to spark future research and pedagogical innovation in these areas of emerging digital media in order to arrive at a greater understanding of the complexities involved in their integration with language learning in ways that will be most relevant to the communicative contexts of the 21st century.

268 citations


Cites background from "Personal space in virtual reality"

  • ...Research has shown that immersive spaces are highly engaging and produce emotions of “real” consequence (Prensky, 2001; Slater et al., 2006; Wilcox, Allison, Elfassy, & Grelik, 2006 )....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
02 Jan 2013-PLOS ONE
TL;DR: It is shown that an experiment that depicts a violent incident at life-size in immersive virtual reality lends support to the social identity explanation, andVerbal interventions made during their experience, and analysis of post-experiment interview data suggest that in-group members were more prone to confrontational intervention compared to the out-group who were moreprone to make statements to try to diffuse the situation.
Abstract: Under what conditions will a bystander intervene to try to stop a violent attack by one person on another? It is generally believed that the greater the size of the crowd of bystanders, the less the chance that any of them will intervene. A complementary model is that social identity is critical as an explanatory variable. For example, when the bystander shares common social identity with the victim the probability of intervention is enhanced, other things being equal. However, it is generally not possible to study such hypotheses experimentally for practical and ethical reasons. Here we show that an experiment that depicts a violent incident at life-size in immersive virtual reality lends support to the social identity explanation. 40 male supporters of Arsenal Football Club in England were recruited for a two-factor between-groups experiment: the victim was either an Arsenal supporter or not (in-group/out-group), and looked towards the participant for help or not during the confrontation. The response variables were the numbers of verbal and physical interventions by the participant during the violent argument. The number of physical interventions had a significantly greater mean in the in-group condition compared to the out-group. The more that participants perceived that the Victim was looking to them for help the greater the number of interventions in the in-group but not in the out-group. These results are supported by standard statistical analysis of variance, with more detailed findings obtained by a symbolic regression procedure based on genetic programming. Verbal interventions made during their experience, and analysis of post-experiment interview data suggest that in-group members were more prone to confrontational intervention compared to the out-group who were more prone to make statements to try to diffuse the situation.

153 citations


Cites methods from "Personal space in virtual reality"

  • ...IVEs provide therefore a powerful tool for experimental studies in social psychology [16] and classic effects such as proxemics [17] where distances that people maintain between themselves are governed by social norms, have been reproduced several times in IVEs with respect to virtual humanoid characters [18,19,20]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
10 Nov 2010
TL;DR: The experiment supported the premise that people exhibit heightened physiological arousal the closer they are approached by virtual characters.
Abstract: An experiment was carried out to examine the impact on electrodermal activity of people when approached by groups of one or four virtual characters at varying distances. It was premised on the basis of proxemics theory that the closer the approach of the virtual characters to the participant, the greater the level of physiological arousal. Physiological arousal was measured by the number of skin conductance responses within a short time period after the approach, and the maximum change in skin conductance level 5 s after the approach. The virtual characters were each either female or a cylinder of human size, and one or four characters approached each subject a total of 12 times. Twelve male subjects were recruited for the experiment. The results suggest that the number of skin conductance responses after the approach and the change in skin conductance level increased the closer the virtual characters approached toward the participants. Moreover, these response variables were inversely correlated with the number of visits, showing a typical adaptation effect. There was some evidence to suggest that the number of characters who simultaneously approached (one or four) was positively associated with the responses. Surprisingly there was no evidence of a difference in response between the humanoid characters and cylinders on the basis of this physiological data. It is suggested that the similarity in this quantitative arousal response to virtual characters and virtual objects might mask a profound difference in qualitative response, an interpretation supported by questionnaire and interview results. Overall the experiment supported the premise that people exhibit heightened physiological arousal the closer they are approached by virtual characters.

128 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Two experiments conducted to test and extend Redirected Walking techniques and implemented many well known redirection techniques into one dynamic RDW application, and investigated the possible role of avatars to slow the users down or make them rotate their heads while exploring.
Abstract: Redirected walking techniques allow people to walk in a larger virtual space than the physical extents of the laboratory. We describe two experiments conducted to investigate human sensitivity to walking on a curved path and to validate a new redirected walking technique. In a psychophysical experiment, we found that sensitivity to walking on a curved path was significantly lower for slower walking speeds (radius of 10 m versus 22 m). In an applied study, we investigated the influence of a velocity-dependent dynamic gain controller and an avatar controller on the average distance that participants were able to freely walk before needing to be reoriented. The mean walked distance was significantly greater in the dynamic gain controller condition, as compared to the static controller (22 m versus 15 m). Our results demonstrate that perceptually motivated dynamic redirected walking techniques, in combination with reorientation techniques, allow for unaided exploration of a large virtual city model.

115 citations

References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: (1956).
Abstract: (1956). Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction. Psychiatry: Vol. 19, No. 3, pp. 215-229.

2,542 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors compared memory for faces with memory for other classes of familar and complex objects which, like faces, are also customarily seen only in 1 orientation (mono-oriented).
Abstract: Compared memory for faces with memory for other classes of familar and complex objects which, like faces, are also customarily seen only in 1 orientation (mono-oriented). Performance of 4 students was tested when the inspection and test series were presented in the same orientation, either both upri

2,448 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: It is proposed that the degree of immersion can be objectively assessed as the characteristics of a technology, and has dimensions such as the extent to which a display system can deliver an inclusive, extensive, surrounding, and vivid illusion of virtual environment to a participant.
Abstract: This paper reviews the concepts of immersion and presence in virtual environments VEs. We propose that the degree of immersion can be objectively assessed as the characteristics of a technology, and has dimensions such as the extent to which a display system can deliver an inclusive, extensive, surrounding, and vivid illusion of virtual environment to a participant. Other dimensions of immersion are concerned with the extent of body matching, and the extent to which there is a self-contained plot in which the participant can act and in which there is an autonomous response. Presence is a state of consciousness that may be concomitant with immersion, and is related to a sense of being in a place. Presence governs aspects of autonomie responses and higher-level behaviors of a participant in a VE. The paper considers single and multiparticipant shared environments, and draws on the experience of ComputerSupported Cooperative Working CSCW research as a guide to understanding presence in shared environments. The paper finally outlines the aims of the FIVE Working Group, and the 1995 FIVE Conference in London, UK.

1,809 citations


"Personal space in virtual reality" refers background in this paper

  • ...In this 2 Animmersive environment is the extent to which computer displays are capable of delivering an inclusive, extensive, surround­ing, and vivid illusion of reality [Slater and Wilbur 1997]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Sep 1965
TL;DR: It is postulated that eye-contact is linked to affiliative motivation, and that approach and avoidance forces produce an equilibrium level of physical proximity, eyecontact and other aspects of intimacy.
Abstract: Previous evidence suggests that eye-contact serves a number of different functions in two-person encounters, of which one of the most important is gathering feed-back on the other person's reactions. It is further postulated that eye-contact is linked to affiliative motivation, and that approach and avoidance forces produce an equilibrium level of physical proximity, eyecontact and other aspects of intimacy. If one of these is disturbed, compensatory changes may occur along the other dimensions. Experiments are reported which suggest that people move towards an equilibrium distance, and adopt a particular level of eye-contact. As predicted, there was less eyecontact and glances were shorter, the closer two subjects were placed together (where one member of each pair was a confederate who gazed continuously at the other). The effect was greatest for opposite-sex pairs. In another experiment it was found that subjects would stand closer to a second person when his eyes were shut, as predicted by the theory.

1,668 citations

Frequently Asked Questions (1)
Q1. What are the contributions in "Personal space in virtual reality" ?

For example, this paper found that subjects exhibited significant negative reactions to violations of interpersonal space in stereoscopic 3D displays, which were equivalent to those experienced in the natural environment.